20 points !

which part of this excerpt from leo tolstoy’s the death of ivan ilyich suggests that gerasim's acceptance of death is related to his spirituality?

a) there was no one in the anteroom, but gerasim darted out of the dead man's room

b) "well, friend gerasim," said peter ivanovich, so as to say something. "it's a sad affair, isn't it? "

c) it's god will. we shall all come to it some day," said gerasim

d) like a man in the thick of urgent work, he briskly opened the front door, called the coachman, peter ivanovich into the sledge, and sprang back to the porch as if in readiness for what he had to do next.

C) It's God will. We shall all come to it some day," said Gerasim.

Explanation:

Leo Tolstoy's novella "The Death of Ivan Ilyich" is about the story of a high court judge suffering and dying from a terminal illness. This fictional work of Tolstoy was considered to be one of the most masterpieces of his time.

Gerasim is a character from the text who was the manservant of the sick Ivan. He was the caretaker of the sick master, and also exhibits a genuine and different quality to that of the other characters in the story. He has a sense of compassion and empathy for his fellow human beings, which most of the other people seem lacking. He relates to the other people, having a sense of deep concern and affection for them. Maybe due to his status or position in the family, he seems to be like this. But he also have a genuine concern for the well being of everyone. He also has a strong belief in the existence of God and the life hereafter. The readers can see the connection of his spirituality and acceptance of death when he said that the death of Ivan is "God's will. We shall all come to it some day".

hello there!

if i was with a celebrity, i would be with andrew lincoln from the walking dead. this is because i love his work he has done in the show and he is a great actor!

read this passage from the crisis. what rationale is paine using for going to war with great britain? my own line of reasoning is to myself as straight and clear as a ray of light. not all the treasures of the world, so far as i believe, could have induced me to support an offensive war, for i think it murder; but if a thief breaks into my house, burns and destroys my property, and kills or threatens to kill me, or those that are in it, and to "bind me in all cases whatsoever" to his absolute will, am i to suffer it? what signifies it to me, whether he who does it is a king or a common man; my countryman or not my countryman; whether it be done by an individual villain, or an army of them? if we reason to the root of things we shall find no difference; neither can any just cause be assigned why we should punish in the one case and pardon in the other.

it is waged war against an army of countrymen

it would lead to independence from britain

it would be an offensive war

it would be a defensive war