# Book 12 Chapter 8 - A Treatise on Smerdyakov, Fyodor Dostoyevsky, The Brothers Karamazov, Librivox Audiobook

An episode of [Brothers Karamazov, The by Fyodor Dostoyevsky (1821 - 1881)](https://invisiblenetwork.ai/podcast/1795736404), 11 Sep 2026, 30 min.

Audio: https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/75073500/brotherskaramazov_87_dostoyevsky_64kb.mp3

All Episodes/Chapters included in this Podcast are taken fron Librivox.org and are in the Public Domain.

## Transcript

[0:01] Speaker 1: CHAPTER VIII. A TREATISE ON SMERDIAKOV. To begin with What
[0:30] Speaker 1: was the source of this suspicion? Ippolit Kirillovitch began. The
[0:35] Speaker 1: first person who cried out that Smirdyakov had committed the
[0:39] Speaker 1: murder was the prisoner himself at the moment of his arrest. Yet,
[0:46] Speaker 1: from that time to this, he had not brought forward
[0:50] Speaker 1: a single fact to confirm the charge, nor the faintest
[0:55] Speaker 1: suggestion of a fact. The charges confirmed by three persons only,
[1:01] Speaker 1: the two brothers of the prisoner and Madame Svyatlov. The
[1:06] Speaker 1: elder of these brothers expressed his suspicions only today, when
[1:12] Speaker 1: he was undoubtedly suffering from brain fever. But we know
[1:16] Speaker 1: that for the last two months he has completely shared
[1:19] Speaker 1: our conviction of his brother's guilt and did not attempt
[1:23] Speaker 1: to combat that idea. But of that later, THE YOUNG
[1:29] Speaker 1: BROTHER HAS ADMITTED THAT HE HAS NOT THE SLIGHTEST FACT
[1:32] Speaker 1: TO SUPPORT HIS NOTION OF SMERDIAKOV'S GUILT, AND HAS ONLY
[1:36] Speaker 1: BEEN LED TO THAT CONCLUSION FROM THE PRISONER'S OWN WORDS
[1:40] Speaker 1: AND THE EXPRESSION OF HIS FACE. YES, THAT ASTOUNDING PIECE
[1:45] Speaker 1: OF EVIDENCE HAS BEEN BROUGHT FORWARD TWICE TODAY BY HIM.
[1:51] Speaker 1: MADAME SPERTLOV WAS EVEN MORE ASTOUNDING. WHAT THE PRISONER TELLS YOU,
[1:56] Speaker 1: YOU MUST BELIEVE. He is not a man to tell
[1:59] Speaker 1: a lie. That is all the evidence against Smerdyakov produced
[2:04] Speaker 1: by these three persons, who are all deeply concerned in
[2:09] Speaker 1: the prisoner's fate. And yet the story of Smerdyakov's guilt
[2:14] Speaker 1: has been noised about, has been, and is still maintained.
[2:19] Speaker 1: Is it credible? Is it conceivable? Here, Ippolit Kirillovitch... thought
[2:26] Speaker 1: it necessary to describe the personality of Smerdyakov, who had
[2:31] Speaker 1: cut short his life in a fit of insanity. He
[2:35] Speaker 1: depicted him as a man of weak intellect, with a
[2:38] Speaker 1: smattering of education, who had been thrown off his balance
[2:43] Speaker 1: by philosophical ideas above his level and certain modern theories
[2:47] Speaker 1: of duty, which he learnt in practice from the reckless
[2:51] Speaker 1: life of his master, who was also perhaps his father.
[2:55] Speaker 1: Fyodor Pavlovich, and, theoretically, from various strange philosophical conversations with
[3:02] Speaker 1: his master's eldest son, Ivan Fyodorovich, who readily indulged in
[3:07] Speaker 1: this diversion, probably feeling dull or wishing to amuse himself
[3:12] Speaker 1: at the valet's expense. He spoke to me himself of
[3:17] Speaker 1: his spiritual condition during the last few days at his
[3:20] Speaker 1: father's house, Hippolyte Kirillovich explained. but others, too, have borne
[3:26] Speaker 1: witness to it. The prisoner himself, his brother, and the
[3:31] Speaker 1: servant Grigory. That is, all who knew him well. Moreover, Smerdyakov,
[3:40] Speaker 1: whose health was shaken by his attacks of epilepsy, had
[3:43] Speaker 1: not the courage of a chicken. He fell at my
[3:47] Speaker 1: feet and kissed them, the prisoner himself has told us,
[3:51] Speaker 1: before he realized that how damaging such a statement was
[3:54] Speaker 1: to himself. He is an epileptic chicken, he declared about
[3:59] Speaker 1: him in his characteristic language, and the prisoner chose him
[4:04] Speaker 1: for his confidant. We have to take his own word
[4:07] Speaker 1: for it. And he frightened him into consenting at last
[4:12] Speaker 1: to act as a spy for him. In that capacity
[4:16] Speaker 1: he deceived his master, revealing to the prisoner the existence
[4:20] Speaker 1: of the envelope with the notes in it, AND THE
[4:23] Speaker 1: SIGNALS BY MEANS OF WHICH HE COULD GET INTO THE HOUSE.
[4:27] Speaker 1: HOW COULD HE HELP TELLING HIM INDEED? HE WOULD HAVE
[4:30] Speaker 1: KILLED ME, I COULD SEE THAT HE WOULD HAVE KILLED ME,
[4:33] Speaker 1: HE SAID IN THE INQUIRY, TREMBLING AND SHAKING, EVEN BEFORE US,
[4:38] Speaker 1: THOUGH HIS TORMENTOR WAS BY THAT TIME ARRESTED AND COULD
[4:42] Speaker 1: DO HIM NO HARM. HE SUSPECTED ME AT EVERY INSTANT,
[4:46] Speaker 1: IN FEAR AND TREMBLING, I HASTENED TO TELL HIM EVERY
[4:50] Speaker 1: SECRET TO PACIFY HIM. that he might see that I
[4:53] Speaker 1: had not deceived him and let me off alive. Those
[4:57] Speaker 1: are his own words. I wrote them down, and I
[5:00] Speaker 1: remember them. When he began shouting at me, I would
[5:04] Speaker 1: fall on my knees. He was naturally very honest, and
[5:10] Speaker 1: enjoyed the complete confidence of his master. Ever since, he
[5:14] Speaker 1: had restored him some money he had lost. So it
[5:18] Speaker 1: may be supposed that the poor fellow suffered pangs of
[5:21] Speaker 1: remorse AT HAVING DECEIVED HIS MASTER, WHOM HE LOVED AS
[5:25] Speaker 1: HIS BENEFACTOR. PERSONS SEVERELY AFFLICTED WITH EPILEPSY ARE, SO THE
[5:31] Speaker 1: MOST SKILLFUL DOCTORS TELL US, ALWAYS PRONE TO CONTINUAL AND
[5:36] Speaker 1: MORBID SELF-REPROACH. THEY WORRY OVER THEIR WICKEDNESS. THEY ARE TORMENTED
[5:42] Speaker 1: BY PANGS OF CONSCIENCE, OF AN ENTIRELY WITHOUT CAUSE. THEY
[5:46] Speaker 1: EXAGGERATE AND OFTEN INVENT ALL SORTS OF FAULTS AND CRIMES.
[5:51] Speaker 1: AND HERE, We have a man of that type who
[5:55] Speaker 1: had really been driven to wrongdoing by terror and intimidation.
[6:02] Speaker 1: He had, besides, a strong presentiment that something terrible would
[6:06] Speaker 1: be the outcome of the situation that was developing before
[6:09] Speaker 1: his eyes. When Ivan Fyodorovich was leaving for Moscow, just
[6:14] Speaker 1: before the catastrophe, Smerdyakov besought him to remain, though he
[6:19] Speaker 1: was too timid to tell him plainly what he feared.
[6:23] Speaker 1: He confined himself to hints, but his hints were not understood.
[6:29] Speaker 1: It must be observed that he looked on Ivan Fyodorovich
[6:32] Speaker 1: as a protector, whose presence in the house was a
[6:36] Speaker 1: guarantee that no harm would come to pass. Remember the
[6:41] Speaker 1: phrase in Dmitri Karamazov's drunken letter, I shall kill the
[6:45] Speaker 1: old man if only Ivan goes away. So Ivan Fyodorovich's presence...
[6:51] Speaker 1: seemed to everyone a guarantee of peace and order in
[6:55] Speaker 1: the house but he went away and within an hour
[7:00] Speaker 1: of his young master's departure smerdyakov was taken with an
[7:04] Speaker 1: epileptic fit but that's perfectly intelligible Here I must mention
[7:10] Speaker 1: that Smirdyakov, oppressed by terror and despair of a sort,
[7:15] Speaker 1: had felt during those last few days that one of
[7:18] Speaker 1: the fits from which he had suffered before at moments
[7:21] Speaker 1: of strain might be coming upon him again. The day
[7:26] Speaker 1: and hour of such an attack cannot, of course, be foreseen,
[7:30] Speaker 1: but every epileptic can feel beforehand that he is likely
[7:34] Speaker 1: to have one. So the doctors tell us. And so
[7:39] Speaker 1: as soon as Ivan Fyodorovich had driven out of the yard, Smertiakov,
[7:44] Speaker 1: depressed by his lonely and unprotected position, went to the cellar.
[7:50] Speaker 1: He went down the stairs, wondering if he could have
[7:53] Speaker 1: a fit or not, and what if it were to
[7:55] Speaker 1: come upon him at once. And that very apprehension, that
[8:00] Speaker 1: very wonder, brought on the spasm in his throat that
[8:04] Speaker 1: always precedes such attacks. And he fell unconscious into the cellar.
[8:11] Speaker 1: And in this perfectly natural occurrence, people tried to detect
[8:14] Speaker 1: his suspicion, a hint that he was shamming an attack
[8:18] Speaker 1: on purpose. But if it were on purpose, the question
[8:25] Speaker 1: arises at once, what was his motive? What was he
[8:30] Speaker 1: reckoning on? What was he aiming at? I say nothing
[8:35] Speaker 1: about medicine. Science, I am told, may go astray. The
[8:40] Speaker 1: doctors were not able to discriminate between the counterfeit and
[8:45] Speaker 1: the real. That may be so, but answer me one question.
[8:52] Speaker 1: What motive had he for such a counterfeit? Could he,
[8:57] Speaker 1: had he been plotting the murder, have desired to attract
[9:01] Speaker 1: the attention of the household by having a fit just before?
[9:06] Speaker 1: You see, gentlemen of the jury, On the night of
[9:10] Speaker 1: the murder, there were five persons in Fyodor Pavlovich. Fyodor
[9:16] Speaker 1: Pavlovich himself. But he did not kill himself, that's evident.
[9:21] Speaker 1: Then his servant, Grigory. But he was almost killed himself.
[9:27] Speaker 1: The third person was Grigory's wife, Marfa Ignatievna. But it
[9:32] Speaker 1: would be simply shameful to imagine her murdering her master.
[9:37] Speaker 1: Two persons are left. the prisoner, and Smerdyakov. But if
[9:43] Speaker 1: we are to believe the prisoner's statement that he is
[9:46] Speaker 1: not the murderer, then Smerdyakov must have been, for there
[9:51] Speaker 1: is no other alternative, no one else can be found.
[9:56] Speaker 1: That is what accounts for the artful, astounding accusation against
[10:01] Speaker 1: the unhappy idiot who committed suicide yesterday. Had a shadow
[10:05] Speaker 1: of suspicion rested on anyone else? Had there been any
[10:09] Speaker 1: sixth person? I am persuaded that even the prisoner would
[10:13] Speaker 1: have been ashamed to accuse Smirdyakov, and would have accused
[10:18] Speaker 1: that sixth person For to charge Smerdyakov with that murder
[10:23] Speaker 1: is perfectly absurd. Gentlemen, let us lay aside psychology. Let
[10:30] Speaker 1: us lay aside medicine. Let us even lay aside logic.
[10:35] Speaker 1: Let us turn only to the facts, and see what
[10:38] Speaker 1: the facts tell us. If Smerdyakov killed him, how did
[10:44] Speaker 1: he do it? Alone, or with the assistance of the prisoner?
[10:50] Speaker 1: let us consider the first alternative, that he did it alone.
[10:55] Speaker 1: If he had killed him, it must have been with
[10:58] Speaker 1: some object, for some advantage to himself. But not having
[11:04] Speaker 1: a shadow of the motive that the prisoner had for
[11:07] Speaker 1: the murder, hatred, jealousy, and so on, smerdyakov could only
[11:13] Speaker 1: have murdered him for the sake of gain in order
[11:16] Speaker 1: to appropriate the three thousand roubles he had seen his
[11:19] Speaker 1: master put in the envelope and yet he tells another
[11:24] Speaker 1: person and the person most closely interested that is the
[11:29] Speaker 1: prisoner everything about the money and the signals where the
[11:33] Speaker 1: envelope lay, what was written on it, what it was
[11:37] Speaker 1: tied up with, and, above all, told him of those
[11:41] Speaker 1: signals by which he could enter the house. Did he
[11:45] Speaker 1: do this simply to betray himself, or to invite to
[11:49] Speaker 1: the same enterprise one who would be anxious to get
[11:53] Speaker 1: that envelope for himself? Yes, I shall be told, but
[11:58] Speaker 1: he betrayed it from fear. But how do you explain this?
[12:03] Speaker 1: A man who could conceive such an audacious, savage act,
[12:08] Speaker 1: and carry it out, tells facts which are known to
[12:12] Speaker 1: no one else in the world, and which, if he
[12:15] Speaker 1: held his tongue, no one else would have guessed. No. No.
[12:21] Speaker 1: HOWEVER COWARDLY HE MIGHT BE, IF HE HAD PLOTTED SUCH
[12:24] Speaker 1: A CRIME NOTHING WOULD HAVE INDUCED HIM TO TELL ANYONE
[12:27] Speaker 1: ABOUT THE ENVELOPE AND THE SIGNALS, FOR THAT WAS AS
[12:31] Speaker 1: GOOD AS BETRAYING HIMSELF BEFOREHAND. HE WOULD HAVE INVENTED SOMETHING.
[12:37] Speaker 1: HE WOULD HAVE TOLD SOME LIE IF HE HAD BEEN
[12:39] Speaker 1: FORCED TO GIVE INFORMATION, BUT HE WOULD HAVE BEEN SILENT
[12:43] Speaker 1: ABOUT THAT. FOR ON THE OTHER HAND, IF HE HAD
[12:47] Speaker 1: SAID NOTHING ABOUT THE MONEY, but had committed the murder
[12:51] Speaker 1: and stolen the money. No one in the world could
[12:54] Speaker 1: have charged him with murder for the sake of robbery,
[12:59] Speaker 1: since no one but he had seen the money. No
[13:03] Speaker 1: one but he knew of its existence in the house.
[13:08] Speaker 1: Even if he had been accused of the murder, it
[13:12] Speaker 1: could only have been thought that he had committed it
[13:15] Speaker 1: from some other motive. but since no one had observed
[13:19] Speaker 1: any such motive in him beforehand, and everyone saw, on
[13:22] Speaker 1: the contrary, that his master was fond of him and
[13:26] Speaker 1: honoured him with his confidence, he would, of course, have
[13:29] Speaker 1: been the last to be suspected. People would have suspected
[13:33] Speaker 1: first the man who had the motive, a man who
[13:37] Speaker 1: had himself declared he had such motives, who had made
[13:42] Speaker 1: no secret of it. They would, in fact, have suspected
[13:46] Speaker 1: that the son of the murdered man, Dmitri Fyodorovich, had
[13:51] Speaker 1: Smirdyakov killed and robbed him, and the son been accused
[13:55] Speaker 1: of it, that would, of course, have suited Smirdyakov. Yet,
[14:01] Speaker 1: are we to believe that it's all plotting the murder
[14:04] Speaker 1: he told that son, Dmitri, about the money, the envelope,
[14:09] Speaker 1: and the signals? Is that logical? Is that clear? when
[14:16] Speaker 1: the day of the murder planned by Smerdyakov came, we
[14:20] Speaker 1: have him falling downstairs in a faint fit. With what object?
[14:25] Speaker 1: In the first place, that Grigory, who had been intending
[14:29] Speaker 1: to take his medicine, might put it off and remain
[14:32] Speaker 1: on guard, seeing there was no one to look after
[14:36] Speaker 1: the house. And in the second place, I suppose, that
[14:39] Speaker 1: his master, seeing that there was no one to guard him,
[14:43] Speaker 1: and in terror of a visit from his son, might
[14:46] Speaker 1: redouble his vigilance and precaution. And, most of all, I
[14:51] Speaker 1: suppose that he is, Merelyakov, disabled by the fit, might
[14:56] Speaker 1: be carried from the kitchen, where he always slept, apart
[15:00] Speaker 1: from all the rest, and where he could go in
[15:02] Speaker 1: and out as he liked, to Grigory's room, at the
[15:06] Speaker 1: other end of the lodge, where he was always put,
[15:09] Speaker 1: shut off by a screen, three paces from their own bed.
[15:14] Speaker 1: This WAS THE MEMORIAL CUSTOM ESTABLISHED BY HIS MASTER AND
[15:19] Speaker 1: THE KIND-HEARTED MARFA IGNATIEVNA, WHENEVER HE HAD A FIT. THERE,
[15:25] Speaker 1: LYING BEHIND THE SCREEN, HE WOULD MOST LIKELY, TO KEEP
[15:29] Speaker 1: UP THE SHAM, HAVE BEGUN GROANING, AND SO KEEPING THEM
[15:33] Speaker 1: AWAKE ALL NIGHT, AS GREGORY AND HIS WIFE TESTIFIED. AND
[15:38] Speaker 1: ALL THIS WE ARE TO BELIEVE THAT HE MIGHT MORE
[15:41] Speaker 1: CONVENIENTLY GET UP AND MURDER HIS MASTER, but I shall
[15:47] Speaker 1: be told that he shamed illness on purpose, that he
[15:51] Speaker 1: might not be suspected, and that he told the prisoner
[15:54] Speaker 1: of the money and the signals to tempt him to
[15:56] Speaker 1: commit the murder. And when he had murdered him, he
[16:00] Speaker 1: had gone away with the money, making a noise, most likely,
[16:05] Speaker 1: and waking people. Smerdyakov got up, I am to believe,
[16:09] Speaker 1: and went in. What for?' to murder his master a
[16:13] Speaker 1: second time and carry off the money that had already
[16:16] Speaker 1: been stolen. Gentlemen, are you laughing? I am ashamed to
[16:22] Speaker 1: put forward such suggestions. But incredibly, as it seems, that's
[16:28] Speaker 1: just what the prisoner alleges. When he had left the house,
[16:34] Speaker 1: had knocked Gregory down and raised an alarm, he tells
[16:37] Speaker 1: us Smirnyakov got up, went in, and murdered his master
[16:41] Speaker 1: and stole the money. I won't press the point that
[16:45] Speaker 1: Smirdyakov could hardly have reckoned on this beforehand, and have
[16:50] Speaker 1: foreseen that the furious and exasperated son would simply come
[16:54] Speaker 1: to peep in respectfully, though he knew the signals, and
[16:59] Speaker 1: beat a retreat, leaving Smirdyakov his booty. Gentlemen of the jury,
[17:05] Speaker 1: I put this question to you in earnest. When was
[17:09] Speaker 1: the moment when Smerdyakov could have committed his crime? Name
[17:16] Speaker 1: that moment, or you can't accuse him. But perhaps the
[17:22] Speaker 1: fit was a real one. The sick man, suddenly recovered,
[17:27] Speaker 1: heard a shout and went out. Well, what then? He
[17:32] Speaker 1: looked about him and said, Why not go and kill
[17:35] Speaker 1: the master? And how did he know what had happened,
[17:40] Speaker 1: since he had been lying unconscious till that moment? But
[17:44] Speaker 1: there's a limit to these flights of fancy. Quite so,
[17:49] Speaker 1: some astute people would tell me. But what if they
[17:52] Speaker 1: were in agreement? What if they murdered him together and
[17:57] Speaker 1: shared the money? What then? A weighty question, truly. and
[18:04] Speaker 1: the facts to confirm it are astounding. One commits the
[18:08] Speaker 1: murder and takes all the trouble, while his accomplice lies
[18:11] Speaker 1: on one side shamming a fit, apparently to arouse suspicion
[18:15] Speaker 1: in everyone, alarm in his master, and alarm in Grigory.
[18:19] Speaker 1: It would be interesting to know what motives could have
[18:22] Speaker 1: induced the two accomplices to form such an insane plan.
[18:28] Speaker 1: But perhaps it was not a case of active complicity
[18:31] Speaker 1: on Smirdyakov's part, but only of passive acquiescence. Perhaps Smirnyakov
[18:39] Speaker 1: was intimidated and agreed not to prevent the murder, and
[18:44] Speaker 1: foreseeing that he would be blamed for letting his master
[18:47] Speaker 1: be murdered without screaming for help or resisting, he might
[18:51] Speaker 1: have obtained permission from Dmitri Karamazov to get out of
[18:55] Speaker 1: the way by shamming a fit. You may murder him
[18:59] Speaker 1: as you like, it's nothing to me. but as this
[19:04] Speaker 1: attack of Smerdyakov's was bound to throw the household into confusion,
[19:09] Speaker 1: Dmitri Karamazov could never have agreed to such a plan.
[19:13] Speaker 1: I will waive that point, however. Supposing that he did agree,
[19:19] Speaker 1: it would still follow that Dmitri Karamazov is the murderer
[19:23] Speaker 1: and the instigator, and Smerdyakov is only a passive accomplice,
[19:28] Speaker 1: and not even an accomplice, but merely acquiesced against his
[19:31] Speaker 1: will through terror. but what do we say as soon
[19:37] Speaker 1: as he is arrested the prisoner instantly throws all the
[19:40] Speaker 1: blame on smith diakov not accusing him of being his
[19:43] Speaker 1: accomplice but of being himself the murderer he did it
[19:47] Speaker 1: alone he says he murdered and robbed him it was
[19:51] Speaker 1: the work of his hands strange sort of accomplices who
[19:55] Speaker 1: begin to accuse one another at once and think of
[19:59] Speaker 1: the risk for After committing the murder while his accomplice
[20:04] Speaker 1: lay in bed, he throws the blame on the invalid,
[20:07] Speaker 1: who might well have resented it, and in self-preservation might
[20:11] Speaker 1: well have confessed the truth. For he might well have
[20:14] Speaker 1: seen that the court would at once judge how far
[20:17] Speaker 1: he was responsible, and so he might well have reckoned
[20:21] Speaker 1: that if he were punished, it would be far less
[20:24] Speaker 1: severely than the real murderer did. and in that case
[20:28] Speaker 1: he would have been certain to make a confession. Yet
[20:33] Speaker 1: he has not done so. Smerdyakov never hinted at their complicity,
[20:39] Speaker 1: though the actual murderer persisted in accusing him and declaring
[20:43] Speaker 1: that he had committed the crime alone. What's more, Smerdyakov,
[20:48] Speaker 1: at the inquiry, volunteered the statement that it was not
[20:52] Speaker 1: he who had told the prisoner of the envelope of
[20:55] Speaker 1: notes and of the signals, and that, but for him,
[20:59] Speaker 1: he would have known nothing about them. If he had
[21:02] Speaker 1: really been a guilty accomplice, would he so readily have
[21:06] Speaker 1: made this statement at the inquiry? On the contrary, he
[21:10] Speaker 1: would have tried to conceal it, to distort the facts,
[21:14] Speaker 1: or minimize them. But he was far from distorting or
[21:18] Speaker 1: minimizing them. No one but an innocent man, who had
[21:22] Speaker 1: no fear of being charged with complicity, could have acted
[21:26] Speaker 1: as he did. And in a fit of melancholy arising
[21:29] Speaker 1: from his disease and this catastrophe, he hanged himself yesterday.
[21:35] Speaker 1: He left a note written in his peculiar language, I
[21:39] Speaker 1: destroy myself of my own will and inclination, so as
[21:42] Speaker 1: to throw no blame on anyone. What would it have
[21:46] Speaker 1: cost him to add, I am the murderer, not Karamazov?
[21:51] Speaker 1: But that he did not add. that his conscience led
[21:55] Speaker 1: him to suicide, but not to avowing his guilt? And
[22:01] Speaker 1: what followed? Notes for three thousand roubles were brought into
[22:06] Speaker 1: the courts just now, and we were told that they
[22:09] Speaker 1: were the same that lay in the envelope now on
[22:12] Speaker 1: the table before us, and that the witness had received
[22:16] Speaker 1: them from Smirdyakov the day before. But I need not
[22:21] Speaker 1: recall the painful scene, though I will make one or
[22:24] Speaker 1: two comments, selecting such trivial ones as might not be
[22:28] Speaker 1: obvious at first sight to everyone, and so may be overlooked.
[22:33] Speaker 1: In the first place, Smerdyakov must have given back the
[22:37] Speaker 1: money and hanged himself yesterday from remorse. And only yesterday
[22:42] Speaker 1: he confessed his guilt to Ivan Karamazov, as the letter
[22:46] Speaker 1: informs us. If it were not so, indeed, why should
[22:51] Speaker 1: Ivan Fyodorovitch kept silence till now. And so, if he
[22:56] Speaker 1: has confessed, then why, I ask again, did he not
[23:01] Speaker 1: avow the whole truth in the last letter he left behind,
[23:04] Speaker 1: knowing that the innocent prisoner had to face this terrible
[23:08] Speaker 1: ordeal the next day? The money alone is no proof.
[23:13] Speaker 1: A week ago, quite by chance, The fact came to
[23:16] Speaker 1: the knowledge of myself and two other persons in this
[23:19] Speaker 1: court that Ivan Fyodorovich had sent two 5% coupons of 5,000 each,
[23:25] Speaker 1: that is, 10,000 in all, to the chief town of
[23:28] Speaker 1: the province, to be changed. I only mention this to
[23:32] Speaker 1: point out that anyone may have money, and that it
[23:36] Speaker 1: can't be proved that these notes are the same as
[23:39] Speaker 1: were in Fyodor Pavlovich's envelope. Ivan Karamazov. after receiving yesterday
[23:45] Speaker 1: a communication of such importance from the real murderer, did
[23:49] Speaker 1: not stir. Why didn't he report it at once? Why
[23:54] Speaker 1: did he put it all off till morning? I think
[23:58] Speaker 1: I have a right to conjecture why. His health had
[24:03] Speaker 1: been giving way for a week past. He had admitted
[24:06] Speaker 1: to a doctor and to his most intimate friends that
[24:10] Speaker 1: he was suffering from hallucinations and seeing phantoms of the deads.
[24:15] Speaker 1: He was on the eve of the attack of brain fever,
[24:18] Speaker 1: by which he has been stricken down to-day. In this condition,
[24:22] Speaker 1: he suddenly heard of Smerdyakov's death, and at once reflected,
[24:28] Speaker 1: The man is dead. I can throw the blame on
[24:30] Speaker 1: him and save my brother. I have money. I will
[24:34] Speaker 1: take a roll of notes and say that Smerdyakov gave
[24:37] Speaker 1: them to me before his death. You could say that
[24:42] Speaker 1: was dishonourable. It's dishonourable to slander even the dead, and
[24:46] Speaker 1: even to save a brother. True. But what if he
[24:52] Speaker 1: slandered him unconsciously? What if, finally unhinged by the sudden
[24:57] Speaker 1: laws of the valet's death, he imagined it really was so?
[25:01] Speaker 1: You saw the recent scene. You have seen the witness's condition.
[25:05] Speaker 1: He was standing up and speaking. But where was his mind?'
[25:10] Speaker 1: Then followed the document, the prisoner's letter written two days
[25:14] Speaker 1: before the crime, and containing a complete program of the murder. Why, then,
[25:19] Speaker 1: are we looking for any other program? The crime was
[25:23] Speaker 1: committed precisely according to this program, and by no other
[25:27] Speaker 1: than the writer of it. Yes, gentlemen of the jury,
[25:31] Speaker 1: it went off without a hitch. He did not run
[25:35] Speaker 1: respectfully and timidly away from his father's window, though he
[25:38] Speaker 1: was firmly convinced that the object of his affections was
[25:42] Speaker 1: with him. No, that is absurd and unlikely. You went
[25:48] Speaker 1: in and murdered him. Most likely he killed him in anger,
[25:53] Speaker 1: burning with resentment, as soon as he locked on his
[25:56] Speaker 1: hated rival. But having killed him, probably with one blow
[26:01] Speaker 1: of the brass pestle, and having convinced himself, after careful search,
[26:06] Speaker 1: that she was not there, he did not, however, forget
[26:10] Speaker 1: to put his hand under the pillow and take out
[26:13] Speaker 1: the envelope, the torn cover of which lies now on
[26:16] Speaker 1: the table before us. I mention this fact that you
[26:20] Speaker 1: may note one, to my thinking, very characteristic circumstance. Had
[26:26] Speaker 1: he been an experienced murderer, and had he committed the
[26:30] Speaker 1: murder for the sake of gain only, Would he have
[26:35] Speaker 1: left the torn envelope on the floor, as it was found,
[26:38] Speaker 1: beside the corpse? Had it been Smerdyakov, for instance, murdering
[26:43] Speaker 1: his master to rob him, he would have simply carried
[26:46] Speaker 1: away the envelope with him, without troubling himself to open
[26:50] Speaker 1: it over his victim's corpse, or he would have known
[26:54] Speaker 1: for certain that the notes were in the envelope, they
[26:58] Speaker 1: had been put in and sealed up in his presence.
[27:02] Speaker 1: and had he taken the envelope with him, no one
[27:05] Speaker 1: would ever have known of the robbery. I ask you, gentlemen,
[27:10] Speaker 1: would Smelt Diakov have behaved in that way? Would he
[27:14] Speaker 1: have left the envelope on the floor? No, this was
[27:19] Speaker 1: the action of a frantic murderer, a murderer who was
[27:23] Speaker 1: not a thief and had never stolen before that day,
[27:26] Speaker 1: who snatched the notes from under the pillow, not like
[27:30] Speaker 1: a thief stealing them, but as though seizing his own
[27:33] Speaker 1: property from the thief who had stolen it. For that
[27:37] Speaker 1: was the idea which had become almost an insane obsession
[27:41] Speaker 1: in Dmitri Karamazov in regard to that money, and pouncing
[27:45] Speaker 1: upon the envelope, which he had never seen before, with
[27:49] Speaker 1: the money in his pocket, even forgetting to consider that
[27:52] Speaker 1: he had left an astounding piece of evidence against himself
[27:55] Speaker 1: in that torn envelope on the floor. All because it
[28:00] Speaker 1: was Karamazov Not Smirdyakov. He didn't think. He didn't reflect.
[28:07] Speaker 1: And how should he? He ran away. He heard behind
[28:11] Speaker 1: him the servants cry out. The old man caught him,
[28:15] Speaker 1: stopped him, and was felled to the ground by the
[28:18] Speaker 1: brass pestle. The prisoner, moved by pity, leapt down to
[28:24] Speaker 1: look at him. Would you believe it? He tells us
[28:29] Speaker 1: that he leapt down out of pity. out of compassion,
[28:33] Speaker 1: to see whether he could do anything for him. Was
[28:36] Speaker 1: that a moment to show compassion? No. He jumped down
[28:41] Speaker 1: simply to make certain whether the only witness of his
[28:44] Speaker 1: crime were dead or alive. Any other feeling, any other motive,
[28:50] Speaker 1: would be unnatural. Note that he took trouble over Gregory,
[28:55] Speaker 1: wiped his head with his handkerchief, and, convincing himself he
[29:00] Speaker 1: was dead— he ran to the house of his mistress,
[29:03] Speaker 1: dazed and covered with blood. How was it he never
[29:08] Speaker 1: thought that he was covered with blood and would be
[29:11] Speaker 1: at once detected? But the prisoner himself assures us that
[29:17] Speaker 1: he did not even notice that he was covered with blood.
[29:20] Speaker 1: That may be believed. That is very possible. That always
[29:24] Speaker 1: happens at such moments with criminals. On one point they
[29:28] Speaker 1: will show diabolical cunning, while another will escape them altogether.
[29:34] Speaker 1: But he was thinking at that moment of one thing only.
[29:39] Speaker 1: Where was she? He wanted to find out at once
[29:42] Speaker 1: where she was, so he ran to her lodging and
[29:45] Speaker 1: learnt an unexpected, an astounding piece of news. She had
[29:50] Speaker 1: gone off to Mokro to meet her first lover. End
[29:56] Speaker 1: of chapter 8 of book 12 Recording by J.C. Guan, Montreal,
[30:01] Speaker 1: March 2009.

Shows are listed from Apple Podcasts' charts and directory, and Podcast Index where it is used. Every show and episode belongs to its publisher and plays from the publisher's own feed; this site hosts none of them.