The bizzare Metaphysics of Ivan the Terrible: Mysticism and Mayhem

Reading a well-written biography, "Ivan the Terrible" by Henri Troyat.

Ivan was an unspeakable butcher, who relished with great personal enjoyment the destruction of entire cities as well as the slow torture of individuals. He even preferred torturing the innocent over the guilty, believing in some way it was congruent with the seemingly random punishments that God (in his conception) dealt out upon the people of the world in the form of capricious natural disasters. By being a random force of nature himself, did Ivan feel that he was somehow connecting to the sacred within himself?

Despite his horrific love of violence and sadism, Ivan was no uncultured brute. He was extremely well-read, especially in theology and the works of early church mystics. One of his favorite passtimes while looting a city was to find the most learned churchmen and conduct an arcane theological debate atop a hill while the city roasted in chaos and screams wafted on the wind.

His palace was described as an odd mix of rooms stuffed to the rafters with priceless parchments and scholarly texts; other rooms bare and decorated with Icons for prayer and contemplation; and yet other rooms full of treasure, gold, gems, priceless fabrics and fur, and luxurious tapestries, where he would hold debauched feasts lasting late into the evening. In the basements below the palace were the extensive prisons and torture chambers.

One part of the book describes a typical day for Ivan:

"At 3 o'clock in the morning, Ivan would [awake and go to church]. During the service, which lasted a good three or four hours, the Czar would sing, pray, and prostrate himself, striking his forehead against the paving stones...

...at 8 o'clock all would gather again to hear mass, and at 10:00 all sat down to a copious repast that the Czar did not touch. Standing in the presence of his brothers, he would read aloud to them from a religious text.

After a short nap, he liked to visit the dungeons to witness the torture of a few prisoners.

...He had a connoisseur's appreciation for the skill of the torturers and the endurance of sufferers. Coming away from mass, his head filled with angelic music, he enjoyed the contrasting pleasure that came from following the slow death of his victims. The spurts of blood, the screams and rattles of drooling mouths -- this rough cookery smelling of pus, excrement, sweat, and burnt flesh was pleasing to his nostrils.

...He took such joy at the bloodbath that he had no doubt, in these moments of horror and ecstasy, that the Lord was at his side...to him, prayer and torture were but two aspects of piety.

The mixture of sadism, scholasticism, hours of devotional prayer, and luxurious evening feasts is quite intense and peculiar.

The question is, how did Ivan resolve his devotionalism (which was, it seems, quite sincere) with his acts of butchery and barbarism? The author speculates that Ivan saw himself chosen to rule by divine forces and somehow closer to God than to man. He would see a city of innocents wiped out by famine, plague, or storm, and perhaps conclude that random acts of violence were somehow a mark of divine power, and one which he was lisensed to indulge in as a divinely chosen force himself.

He slammed his body against rough cathedral stones hour after hour in prayer, seeking mystical transcendence, or plulnged into ancient scrolls of history and philosophy. Then he would seek some similar kind of transcendence entranced by the groans in his torture-dungeons, or riding out with his men to destroy a village for no reason at all.

What explanation for this pathological metaphysic?

a reply to: Never Despise

If I had a time machine and a small modern arsenal I would go back and erase this piece of #.

a reply to: Wide-Eyes

Doubtless many would thank you.
Although Ivan was exceptionally cruel, he did manage to expand Russia's power and overall stability in a world in which it was surrounded by enemy states. And while perhaps less psychotic, the medieval rulers of Russia's rivals at the time were hardly models of mercy. It's hard to say what would have happened to Russia without Ivan at the time.

But his excesses seem to place him in that group of tyrants without excuse. He killed his own son and heir in an outburst of rage, for goodness sake.

Sounds like since he could not connect with God through other people, he looked towards physical items to define his concepts of God. He got caught up in the moments of pain, suffering and torture while ignoring the impacts these communities have on the world.

I expect to find a very troubled childhood with Ivan. Don't know what got him started, got addicted to that blood lust and had the means to carry it out.

a reply to: kwakakev

The insight about Ivan's troubled childhood is bang-on. He was orphaned at an early age and raised by a council of noblemen who treated him cruelly, locked in a little room all alone with nothing and not even fed properly. The nobles were more concerned with plundering the Treasury and infighting among themselves than with the little Czar. On ritual occasions he would be pulled out of his cell and dressed up in royal finery to be displayed on the throne, and then stripped of his golden robes and tossed back in his bare cell after the ceremony.

He enjoyed torturing birds and dogs as a child...what modern psychiatrists call "the first and the worst" sign of psychopathy.

a reply to: Wide-Eyes

That is so weird. Exact same thought I had.
I've added him to my personal list as well

How did he square all his fancies writhing within himself?

I dunno but he would strike a fitting role in the NWO

a reply to: slatesteam
That is exactly my question. How can you spend half the day reading holy injunctions to moral action and the other half bathing in blood?

Here is a passage from late in the book:

"And to tell the truth...here on earth, [God] indulged in the purest caprice. In this world He caused crime to go unpunished and Innocence to be trampled underfoot. He distributed His blows without rhyme or reason, caring about the deserts of neither those He raised up nor those He struck down. He set before all monarchs, who were the representatives of His power on earth, an example of cruelty and inconsistency. How could He be angry with them for being like Him? The more arbitrary Ivan was in his punishments, the more pleasing he must be to the Master of nature.

The Czar repeated this to himself all day long for reassurance...he would wander about the palace, talking out loud to himself. He dreaded the coming of nightfall, because it brought apocalyptic visions...

Looking back on Ivan, I’m sure the most learned modern psychologist would use the term f##king nuts.

So he made Russia great again 🙂Yay! Dracula beheaded, boiled, burned, skinned, maimed, and impaled... and also stopped Turks. Is it only a reaction to violence that people summon a greater evil to lead them? He at least didnt pretend that his god is not the devil.
The god of this world appoints the ruling class since ancient times to this day. Even without wars Aztecs among others sacrificed up to 250.000 people each year. Maybe more
Almost everyone knows there's an untouchable psychotic ruling class. Question is how do we stop them? Communism was proven even worse. A republic is not immune either.

originally posted by: PapagiorgioCZ

Almost everyone knows there's an untouchable psychotic ruling class. Question is how do we stop them?

They are not invincible. Goodness is what saves us, but it has to be implemented again and again.


"Do you remember that little boy, Papa?"

"Yes. I remember him."

"Do you think he’s all right that little boy?"

"Oh yes. I think he’s all right."

"Do you think he was lost?"

"No. I don't think he was lost."

"I’m scared that he was lost."

"I think he’s all right."

"But who will find him if he’s lost? Who will find that little boy?"

"Goodness will find the little boy. It always has. It will again."

-Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Amazing how many crazy bastards are driven and validated by their belief in what they think is "God."

Some things never change

a reply to: Silcone Synapse

Ivan's view seems singularly twisted...there can't have been many who subscribed to this kind of thought.

Great thread OP. Terrible men are often horribly interesting. Ghengis Khan was also a bit interesting. I think he would pray to every God and have different religions around as to gain favor from them all. Also, another horrible ruler in history.

The random acts of violence to innocent people must have made it terrifying to be in his presence.

originally posted by: Never Despise

What explanation for this pathological metaphysic?

Uh ... Maybe dude was s friggin' psychopath?

Yeah, I think that's Occam's answer: Ivan was a raging, twisted psychopath. World for me.

It was fairly common that when it come to good or bad luck, that it was an act of divine power. And whatever happens, meant something. Even the Reincarnation or Fate theologies followed suit, an if you born rich or poor, victorious or a loser, or a bird #s on you, you deserved it.

I am the flail of god. Had you not created great sins; god would not have sent a punishment like me upon you.” –Genghis Khan

Guy sounds like he just really wanted to get high, an lacked alot of stimulation in his life. Specially with connecting to God, due to the scent of his victims feces.

originally posted by: incoserv

originally posted by: Never Despise

What explanation for this pathological metaphysic?

Uh ... Maybe dude was s friggin' psychopath?

Yeah, I think that's Occam's answer: Ivan was a raging, twisted psychopath. World for me.

I'd say psychopath is a fair review...but most psychopaths don't take such a deep and active interest in religion and butchery simultaneously. He was also "high-functioning" enough to strengthen and expand his empire, despite his crazed rages. This makes him more interesting than a garden variety psycho IMHO.

a reply to: Specimen88

Genghis was not as conspicuously cruel as Ivan. As soon as you surrendered to Genghis, the butchery stopped. He wouldn't slaughter or torture people for no reason like Ivan.

a reply to: Never Despise

Ivan the Psychopath

The only explanation I can think of....

Great thread BTW.

SnF

After reading this book I am convinced there was a difference in the way the Russians looked at the Tsar vs. the way the western Europeans looked at their kings.

Although the concept of "Divine right of kings" was common in the west until the French Revolution, the Russians took it to a whole other level. This is where Russia's ambivalent relationship with Asia comes in: Ivan was almost seen more like a Japanese Emperor: semi-divine in a sense; or like the Chinese Emperors: standing half way between heaven and earth. He simply didn't see himself -- and was not seen by his subjects -- as a "normal" man but rather as a kind of heavenly ambassador.

And heaven could be cruel as well as kind in the Russian imagination, their long dark history is filled with tragedy and hardscrabble survival to an extent far beyond what the Western nations went through.

The Western aristocracy was stronger, too: the nobility in France or England could and did unite against the kings at times, but resisting the Tsar's will was unthinkable. Ivan actually deprived the entire old nobility of their lands, pushed them out east, and seized the western lands as his private property. The Russians also had the Serf system, which was essentially slavery (although it was not such a large class in Ivan's time). On the Eastern and Southern fronts, Russia dealt with absolute despotic warlords like the Golden Horde, various Islamic states, the Ottomans, and the Persians. It was natural for them to develop a system influenced by "Asiatic absolutism."

Absolute power in the hands of a probable psychopath who had been abused as a child and grew up paranoid, yet intelligent enough to absorb some Eastern Orthodox theology...a deadly cocktail.