Ele almış olduğu edebi çalışmalarıyla hem Rus edebiyatını hem de dünya edebiyatını derinden etkileyen L. N. Tolstoy, edebi çalışmalarının yanı sıra ortaya atmış olduğu öğretisiyle de yaşadığı dönemde (18281910) ses getirmiştir. Yazar Rusya'da dönem içerisinde olumlu ve olumsuz birçok eleştiri alır ve belirli bir görüşe bağlı olan yazar ve eleştirmenler tarafından Tolstoy'un kaleme aldıkları kendi taraflarına çekilmeye çalışılır. Özellikle büyük yazarın kötülüğe karşı koymama fikri en çok yoğunlaşılan konu olur. Tolstoy herhangi bir zümreye bağlı olmadan eserlerini kaleme alan bir yazardır. Bu yüzden dönem Rusya'sında ortaya çıkan sosyal, politik, ekonomik vb. birçok olay hakkında düşüncesini çekinmeden dile getirir. Tolstoy her şeyden önce insana, insana karşı duyulan saf ve temiz sevgiye ve iyi ahlaklı olmaya önem veren bir yazardır. Bu yüzden Tolstoy için yeryüzündeki hiçbir öğreti, din, felsefi görüş onun kendi içerisinde temel edindiği bu nitelikleri karşılayamamıştır. Doğal olarak yazar yukarıda sözünü ettiğimiz düşüncelerle kendi dünya görüşünü oluşturmuştur. Kendi dünya görüşünü oluştururken de dönem içerisinde olumlu ve olumsuz birçok değerlendirme görür. L. N. Tolstoy edebi sanatı önünde saygı duyulan bir yazardır. Fakat konu insanı ilgilendiren diğer alanlara geldiğinde edebiyatta sağlamış olduğu bu başarıyı gösteremez. Çalışmamızda büyük yazarın edebi kişiliğinin yanı sıra ortaya çıkmış olan öğretisi Rus eleştirmenlerinin gözüyle ele alınmaya çalışılacaktır

L. N. Tolstoi who deeply influenced both Russian and World Literature with his literary works made tremendous impact also with the doctrine he put forward during his lifetime . The writer receives many negative and positive reviews and Tolstoi’s writings are made use of by some writers and critics for their own ideologies and life views. Especially, the great author’s ideas about not standing up to evil becomes the most focused subject. Tolstoi writes his works without being attached to any group or party. Therefore, he intrepidly expresses his ideas on the social, political, economic etc. events at that time in Russia. Tolstoi places emphasis first on human, the pure love human beings feel for themselves and morality. This is why to Tolstoi no doctrine, religion, philosophical view did not correspond to these qualities he adopted within himself. Naturally, the author composed his own world view by grounding on the ideas mentioned above. While creating his own world view, he receives many positive and negative evaluations during the period. L. N. Tolstoy is a respected writer in literature. But he can not show this success that the subject has been given in literature when he comes to other areas of interest. In this study, the great author’s doctrine from the point of view of the Russian critics as well as his literary identity will be investigated In this article, the short biography of writer and his teaching which underpins our study was tackled. The writer was born in Yasnaya Polyana, near the city of Tula, on September 9 1828. Born in a wealthy and noble family Tolstoi was raised and educated in ideal conditions. His passion for literature shows up at his young ages and thus he begins to write. In our opinion, what distinguishes Tolstoi from other Russian writers is the fact that he kept diaries at young ages. Thanks to the diaries he kept until the end of his life, we have detailed ideas about the great author’s life, thoughts and world view. Contrary to many other writers coming from noble families, Tolstoi hates aristocratic life style all his life and finds the real happiness among peasants. To the author, peasants are the symbol of honesty, sedulity, pure life, that is to say, the real Russia. Therefore, he especially struggles to improve the living conditions of those that are subject to him, even opens a school in Yasnaya Polyana and takes care of children’s education by himself. For Tolstoi, the class he belongs to is of secondary importance and thus he strives to spend his time with peasants. Tolstoi, who writes very important novels both for the Russian literature and world literature such as “War and Peace”, “Anna Karenina”, “Resurrection” etc., becomes a figure who is often mentioned about during the period he lives. Of course, while there some people find what the great author wrote interesting and like him, some others completely oppose his thoughts. His works are evaluated both in terms of literary and philosophical, social, political qualities. The teaching of the author during his that time, especially appearing towards the end of his life, is also often reviewed and it is interpreted within the Russian literary circles both negatively and positively. The Evaluation of Tolstoi’s Teaching by the Russian Critics Tolstoi is among the rare authors creating his own ethics and world view. This makes him a unique writer. Tolstoi’s teaching receives sharp criticism from the critics of his time. Tolstoi’s teaching shows up in the series called “Stories for the People” which he begins to write after “Anna Karenina”. The Critic N.K.Mihailovskiy, who analyses these stories by Tolstoi, says that the author tries to make people adopt all nonsense stuff and lashes him. He states that instead of fighting with common superstitions, Tolstoi tries to reinforce these superstitions and prejudices more(Bıçkov, 1952, s.36). However, the critic says that the real tendencies in the stories go to a point where one cannot stand against the evil. In Mihailovskiy’s opinion, the story called “Skazka ob İvane Durake” indicates that Tolstoi cannot resist artistic descriptions but the story includes the flawed theory by the author as well. The critic rejects the Tolstoi’s exalted world view depicted in the Bible. He thinks that Tolstoi’s stories damage people’s conscious and asserts that one should speak to people with a different language without using religious-fantastic images. We can also see Tolstoi’s teaching and moral aspect in his third great novel “Resurrection”. The primary criticism directed the moral aspect of Tolstoi “Resurrection” comes from A.P. Chekhov: “The end is not interesting and technically absurd” (Çehov, 1900, s.47). Chekhov who says that he devoured Tolstoi’s novel writes these lines in one of his letters: “That is a perfectly artistic work. What is not normal is the conversations between Nehlyudov and Katyusha on their relationships and the most important things are knezs, generals, aunts, prisoners, peasants and custodians. I devoured the spiritualism scene of the commander of the Petropavlovsk Castle who was near the general, it was so nice! And what to say about the sitting of Korchagin in the armchair and that peasant, Fedosya’s husband! But there does not exist an end that we can call the end of story. You write, you write, you write and then you put a text from the Bible. That’s too much fatalism.” (Çehov, 1900, s.47). Another critic analysing Tolstoi’s teaching is Korolenko. Koroşlenko ponders deeply on Tolstoi’s teaching. In 1886 he meets Tolstoi in person. Upon his meeting with Tolstoi, a vivid portrait of the great writer sticks in his mind. But korolenko, who admires Tolstoi both as an artist and a man, criticises harshly the attitude of not resisting the evil in Tolstoi’s story called“Skazanii o Flore, Agrippe i Menaheme, sıne İyegudı (1886)”. Korolenko has admiration for Tolstoi’s artistic power but he criticizes Tolstoi’s teaching and finds him unsuccessful as a thinker(Bıçkov, 1952, s.43). We aim to demonstrate the evaluation of the great author L.N. Tolstoi’s teaching that appeared in the period he lived, and developed especially towards the end of his life, by the Russian critics. The research we conducted demonstrates that the Russian critics and writers bow respectfully before Tolstoi but find his theory unsuccessful as a thinker. The writers and critics analyzed in our study express their criticism apart from their interest in the works of Tolstoi. In addition to Tolstoi’s discourses, the Russian writers and critics evaluate Tolstoi’s teaching by analyzing the contents of his works and his characters. Among the writers and critcs tackled in the study, only Plekhanov and Chekhov tend to apply a more moderate criticism compared to others. Tolstoi was a writer close to his people during all his life. Especially, his deeds for the good of peasants aimed at improving their living conditions. Therefore, it is not surprising that his teaching was shaped within the framework of idea projecting a better life for peasants. In our assessment, while we find the works of Tolstoi’s literary works quite successful, we find his teaching formed based on the Bible not so accomplished as his art like the critics and writers we talked about. In our opinion, the teaching of great writer will be open to discussion as it was in the past and will be tackled by the researchers, scientist and teachers of literature interested in Tolstoi