Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for :

  • "Russian sophiology" x
  • Refine by Access: All Content x
Clear All

The paper bellow aims at presenting and discussing Father Pavel Florensky's  Sophiology on the basis of his theodicy concentrated in his doctorial dissertation published in 1914 which contains scrupulously detailed argumentations. Summarising his views concerning a positive approach to the utmost essential function and mission of philosophy, i.e. revealing the Higher Truth, Florensky points out his belief that it unquestionably belongs to the sphere of the Transcendent. Truth, which thus is knowledgeable exclusively via scrutinising the nature of the Holy Spirit (here Florensky intensely disputes Kantian agnosticism), is consequently to be observed as the indivisible single whole. The author attempts to systematise the ancient tradition of Sophia, which has been existent in a latent fashion in Russian mentality, by throwing some light upon both its roots to be traced back in the Old Testament and in patristics, and in Russian iconography. Florensky's work, whose unique impact on turn-of-the-century Russian Symbolist circles (Belyj and Blok) is not to be ignored, offers an insight into the theoretical background of Russian Sophiology. Following in the footsteps of Vl. Solovyev and referring to the Fathers of Church, Florensky considers it completely feasible to link Sophiology to living Christian theology and practice, offering denials against accusations of heresy. Utilising abundant interdisciplinary methods in his argumentation Florensky emphasises strife upon behalf of the self oriented towards the principle of self-perfection-a main trend also prophesied by his contemporary N. Berdjaev. Concepts of memory, dichotomies of darkness and light are given detailed discussion, from which, in harmony with Florensky's teachings, follows the transition from the empirical state of time and space to the higher realm of the Absolute. In this process dualism may be conquered by the interfering principle of the Holy Sophia (this interpretation modifies scanty clues found in Solovyev's oeuvre), who represents the principle of Unification. A novel differentiation provides distinction between Western Philosophy and Russian Sophiology by marking the historically corrupt Sophia in the former.

Restricted access

“Every Russian writer owes something to Gogol.” This Nabokovian statement questions beliefs traditionally formulated in respect to Gogol’s oeuvre. His book paradoxically introduced by the depiction of the writer’s death implies that the motif of death has a specific impact on the genesis of the artefact. The similar postmodernist theory by Terc echoes in part ideas found in the symbolist perception of Gogol (Annensky, Blok, Rozanov, Merezhkovsky, and Andrei Bely). Gogol’s poetics centred upon this principle, reminiscent of Dante’s Divine Comedy, can be traced throughout the works of Russian authors – a thesis to be scrutinised in a series of forthcoming articles. The irrational in Gogol’s views concerning true art thus shall discard the labels of critical realism and art envisaged as the device meant to perfect human society, consequently via the transmutation of the self shall true art fulfil its ultimate mission. Introducing the dichotomy of ‘poet’ – ‘non-poet’ indicates a precursor of the Solovyovian doctrine of the superman. The ideal of transgression is expressed through applying the medieval interpretation of the language distinguishing Dante’s work, offering a profound reading of texts. The poetics of death penetrating Gogol’s works implicates handling and interpreting of various phenomena of culture synthesised, including models of self-perfection realised by alchemy, freemasonry, and Russian sophiology.

Restricted access