“您怎么还不明白？不过，我会解释的，或许的确令人费解。请跟着我的思路听下去：我把别人相信我的人格交给我的三千卢布当成自己的，纵酒作乐花个精光，到明天我去见她，说：‘卡嘉，对不起，我把你的三千卢布全花了，’——这样好吗？当然不好，这是不名誉的、卑怯的行为，我是畜生，是个不懂得控制自己而沦为畜生的人，是不是这样？但毕竟不是贼吧？不是彻头彻尾的贼，你们必须同意！钱被我花了，但我没有偷！现在再说另一种更为有利的办法，请注意听，因为我也许又会语无伦次。我好像有点儿头晕。好，另一种办法是：我在这儿只花掉三千卢布中的一半，也就是一千五。第二天我去见她，把剩下的一半带去，说：‘卡嘉，我是个可恶的、没头脑的混蛋，因为一半我已经花掉了，这一半你拿回去吧，否则这剩下的一半也会被我花光的，你还是让我少造点儿孽吧！’这办法怎么样？当然我仍是畜生和混蛋，但已经不是贼，绝对不是贼。如果是贼，肯定不会把剩下的一半送回去，而是同样据为己有了。这样她就会看到，既然我把一半还给她，另外一半——就是花掉的一千五——我也会还的，我一定会想尽办法，哪怕干一辈子活也要还她。这样一来，尽管是混蛋，但不是贼，说我什么都可以，但不能说我是贼！”

“就算有某些差别，”检察官冷冷地一笑，“但您认为其间的差别大得不得了——我仍然感到奇怪。”

“是的，我认为其间的差别大得不得了！每个人都可能是混蛋，恐怕也确实都是混蛋，但不是每个人都可能做贼，只有大混蛋才可能。当然，我不善于十分精确地表达……。反正贼比混蛋更混蛋，我就认这个死理儿。请继续听我说。我把钱带在身上足足有一个月，每天都打算第二天送回去，那样我就不算太混蛋了，可总是下不了决心。虽然天天有这样的打算，虽然天天在催促自己：‘下决心吧，混蛋，下决心吧，’——但是整整一个月下来，还是老样子。你们认为这样好吗？”

......

“依我说，您留有余地，没有把钱全花光，这样做还是明智而且合乎道德的，”尼古拉·帕尔菲诺维奇忍俊不禁地说，“这有什么值得大惊小怪的？”

“因为我偷了钱，问题就在这里！噢，上帝啊，你们怎么这样不开窍哇！我把这一千五百卢布缝起来挂在胸前的这段时间，每天每时都在对自己说：‘你是个贼，你是个贼！’这一个月我之所以动不动就大发雷霆，之所以在酒店里跟别人打架，之所以殴打父亲，就因为我觉得自己做了贼！我甚至不敢把这一千五的秘密向我的弟弟阿辽沙透露，因为我深感自己是个混蛋加骗子！但是，请你们理解，只要我把这护身符带在胸前，我就每天每时也可以对自己说：‘不，德米特里·费奥多罗维奇，你或许还不算贼。’为什么？因为你明天就可以去把这一千五百卢布还给卡嘉。直到昨天我从菲妮娅那儿去别尔霍津家的时候，才决定从脖子上扯下我的护身符，而在那时以前一直没有勇气；可是一旦扯了下来，我立刻成了一个不折不扣、地地道道的贼，永生永世是一个贼，一个无耻之徒。为什么？因为我在撕破护身符的同时也撕破了我去向卡嘉说‘我是混蛋，可我不是贼’的幻想！现在你们该明白了！”

《卡拉马佐夫兄弟》 第九卷  之七  米嘉的大秘密，遭嘘

“I wonder at you. But I’ll make it clearer. Perhaps it really is incomprehensible. You see, attend to what I say. I appropriate three thousand entrusted to my honour, I spend it on a spree, say I spend it all, and next morning I go to her and say, ‘Katya, I’ve done wrong, I’ve squandered your three thousand,’ well, is that right? No, it’s not right—it’s dishonest and cowardly, I’m a beast, with no more self-control than a beast, that’s so, isn’t it? But still I’m not a thief? Not a downright thief, you’ll admit! I squandered it, but I didn’t steal it. Now a second, rather more favourable alternative: follow me carefully, or I may get confused again—my head’s going round—and so, for the second alternative: I spend here only fifteen hundred out of the three thousand, that is, only half. Next day I go and take that half to her: ‘Katya, take this fifteen hundred from me, I’m a low beast, and an untrustworthy scoundrel, for I’ve wasted half the money, and I shall waste this, too, so keep me from temptation!’ Well, what of that alternative? I should be a beast and a scoundrel, and whatever you like; but not a thief, not altogether a thief, or I should not have brought back what was left, but have kept that, too. She would see at once that since I brought back half, I should pay back what I’d spent, that I should never give up trying to, that I should work to get it and pay it back. So in that case I should be a scoundrel, but not a thief, you may say what you like, not a thief!”

“I admit that there is a certain distinction,” said the prosecutor, with a cold smile. “But it’s strange that you see such a vital difference.”

“Yes, I see a vital difference! Every man may be a scoundrel, and perhaps every man is a scoundrel, but not every one can be a thief, it takes an arch-scoundrel to be that. Oh, of course, I don’t know how to make these fine distinctions … but a thief is lower than a scoundrel, that’s my conviction. Listen, I carry the money about me a whole month, I may make up my mind to give it back to-morrow, and I’m a scoundrel no longer, but I cannot make up my mind, you see, though I’m making up my mind every day, and every day spurring myself on to do it, and yet for a whole month I can’t bring myself to it, you see. Is that right to your thinking, is that right?”

......

Both the lawyers laughed aloud.

“I should have called it sensible and moral on your part not to have squandered it all,” chuckled Nikolay Parfenovitch, “for after all what does it amount to?”

“Why, that I stole it, that’s what it amounts to! Oh, God, you horrify me by not understanding! Every day that I had that fifteen hundred sewn up round my neck, every day and every hour I said to myself, ‘you’re a thief! you’re a thief!’ Yes, that’s why I’ve been so savage all this month, that’s why I fought in the tavern, that’s why I attacked my father, it was because I felt I was a thief. I couldn’t make up my mind, I didn’t dare even to tell Alyosha, my brother, about that fifteen hundred: I felt I was such a scoundrel and such a pickpocket. But, do you know, while I carried it I said to myself at the same time every hour: ‘No, Dmitri Fyodorovitch, you may yet not be a thief.’ Why? Because I might go next day and pay back that fifteen hundred to Katya. And only yesterday I made up my mind to tear my amulet off my neck, on my way from Fenya’s to Perhotin. I hadn’t been able till that moment to bring myself to it. And it was only when I tore it off that I became a downright thief, a thief and a dishonest man for the rest of my life. Why? Because, with that I destroyed, too, my dream of going to Katya and saying, ‘I’m a scoundrel, but not a thief!’ Do you understand now? Do you understand?’’

The Brother Karamazov  Book IX 7. Mitya's Great Secret. Received with Hisses 

"Chaque homme porte la forme entière de l'humanine condition"

"Every man carries the entire form of human condition"

Essais by Montaigne, Of Repentance

“佐西马长老不止一次谈过这个问题，”阿辽沙指出，“他也曾说，人的面孔往往会阻碍许多还没有施爱经验的人去爱别人。然而人类中不是也有许多爱吗？而且几乎无异于基督的博爱，这一点我自己知道，伊万……”

“这一点我目前还不知道，也无法理解，而且有不计其数的人也和我一样。问题在于这是人们恶劣的品质造成的呢，还是他们的本性使然。我认为，基督对人们的博爱在某种程度上是世间不可能出现的奇迹。诚然，他是神。但我们可不是神。举例说，假定我正在忍受水深火热之苦，但别人决不可能知道我痛苦到什么程度，因为他是另一个人，不是我，况且很少有人愿意承认别人是受难者（好像那是一种头衔）。你认为人们不愿意承认的原因何在？原因很多，比方说我有异味，我一脸蠢相，或者有一次我踩了他的脚。此外，苦难也有各种各样。如果是低人一等的苦难，比如饥饿，我的恩人还可以承认我受苦；但若是高级一些的苦难，比如为思想所受的苦，他能予以承认的简直绝无仅有。因为他朝我一看，忽然发现我的脸与他想象中一个为某种思想而受苦的人应该有的脸大不一样。于是他马上剥夺我接受他恩惠的资格，甚至完全不是由于他心地不好。乞丐，特别是出身高贵的乞丐，决计不可抛头露面，只能通过报纸求乞。抽象地爱邻人还可以，或者从远处爱也行，但在近处几乎决不可能。倘若一切都像在舞台上跳芭蕾那样，乞丐出场时身穿丝绸破衣服，戴着破花边，一边乞讨，一边翩翩起舞，那时还可以欣赏他们。欣赏，但毕竟不是爱。”

《卡拉马佐夫兄弟》 第五卷  之四  反叛

“Father Zossima has talked of that more than once,” observed Alyosha, “he, too, said that the face of a man often hinders many people not practised in love, from loving him. But yet there’s a great deal of love in mankind, and almost Christ-like love. I know that myself, Ivan.”

“Well, I know nothing of it so far, and can’t understand it, and the innumerable mass of mankind are with me there. The question is, whether that’s due to men’s bad qualities or whether it’s inherent in their nature. To my thinking, Christ-like love for men is a miracle impossible on earth. He was God. But we are not gods. Suppose I, for instance, suffer intensely. Another can never know how much I suffer, because he is another and not I. And what’s more, a man is rarely ready to admit another’s suffering (as though it were a distinction). Why won’t he admit it, do you think? Because I smell unpleasant, because I have a stupid face, because I once trod on his foot. Besides there is suffering and suffering; degrading, humiliating suffering such as humbles me—hunger, for instance,—my benefactor will perhaps allow me; “but when you come to higher suffering—for an idea, for instance—he will very rarely admit that, perhaps because my face strikes him as not at all what he fancies a man should have who suffers for an idea. And so he deprives me instantly of his favour, and not at all from badness of heart. Beggars, especially genteel beggars, ought never to show themselves, but to ask for charity through the newspapers. One can love one’s neighbours in the abstract, or even at a distance, but at close quarters it’s almost impossible. If it were as on the stage, in the ballet, where if beggars come in, they wear silken rags and tattered lace and beg for alms dancing gracefully, then one might like looking at them. But even then we should not love them. ”

The Brother Karamazov  Book V 4. Rebellion