/
Search results


Крючков Т. О. Имя и энергия между сущностью и ипостасью (к некоторым темам современной критики имяславия) // Вестник ПСТГУ. Серия I: Богословие. Философия. Религиоведение. 2017. Вып. 71. С. 30-49. DOI: 10.15382/sturI201771.30-49
This article deals with problems of Orthodox understanding of the category “energy” in the context of the formula of Imiaslavie “The name of God is the energy of God”. Based on works by S.S. Khoruzhii and P.Yu. Malkov, the paper critically analyses contemporary studies of Russian theologians and philosophers that look for inconsistencies in the doctrine of the energy nature of the name and ideas about energy as an agent of substance. The paper also raises a number of issues related to seeing magism in the concept of name-energy which presumably makes possible to determine God through the knowledge of God’s name. Another issue is the understanding of energy as a symbol, i.e. as a category that implies an alien element with regard to the substance which the energy belongs to. The doctrine of energy as the agent of the substance does not mean that a concrete person is devoid of the status of the acting one. Besides, in the context of debate with mono-energists and mono-philites, such attribution of energy to substance was supposed to point to the fashion of the action, rather than to the hypostasis being devoid of the relationship with energy. This demonstrates that the identification of Imiaslavie, which does see the energy in proper names, with mono-energist conceptions of action is not tenable. An analysis of texts by St. Gregory of Palamas attests to the contradictory character of modern theologians’ attempts to contrast the idea about name as energy with those views that were developed in the course of Palamist controversies in the 14th century as to the question about the link between the categories of energy and hypostasis. The cited texts by St. Gregory of Palamas show that they do not exclude a connection between the notions of hypostasis and energy.
Imiaslavie, Energy, Hypostasis, Substance, meon, mono-energy, symbol

Breye E., “Kak ya ponimayu istoriu Filosofi i”, in: Breye E., Filosofi ya Plotina, Saint Petersburg, 2012, 277–288.
Losev A. F., “Filosofiya imeni u Platona”, in: Nachala, 1–4, 1995, 206–214.
Losev A. F., “Imyaslavie”, in: Losev A. F., Lichnost’ i Absolyut, Moscow, 1999, 226– 238
Malkov P. Yu., “Imya Bozhie i pravoslavnaya ikona v kontekste svyatootecheskogo bogosloviya”, in: Malkov P. Yu., Po obrazu Slova: Stat’i, Moscow, 2007, 136–154.
Malkov P. Yu., “Soteriologicheskiy aspect pravoslavnogo ucheniya ob imeni Boeheim”, in: Malkov P.Yu., Po obrazu Slova. Stat’i, Moscow, 2007, 120–135.
Mesyats S. V., “Est’ li «ipostas’» u Pervonachala”, in: ΠΛΑΤΩΝΙΚΑ ΖΗΤΕΜΑΤΑ. Issledovaniya po istorii platonizma, Moscow, 2013, 318–337.
Petrov V. V., “ΥΠΑΡΧΩ i ΥΦΙΣΤΗΜΙ”, in: ΠΛΑΤΩΝΙΚΑ ΖΗΤΕΜΑΤΑ. Issledovaniya po istorii platonizma, Moscow, 2013, 339–375.
Petrov V. V., “Simvol i svyashchennodeystvie v pozdnem neoplatonizme i v «Areopagitskomkorpuse»”, in: ΠΛΑΤΩΝΙΚΑ ΖΗΤΕΜΑΤΑ. Issledovaniya po istorii platonizma, Moscow, 2013, 264–317.
Khoruzhiy S. S., “Imyaslavie i kul’tura Serebryanogo veka: fenomen Moskovskoy shkoly khristianskogo neoplatonizma”, in: Bulgakov S. N. BulgakovReligiozno-fi losofskiy put’: Mezhdunarodnaya nauchnaya konferentsiya, posvyashchennaya 130-letiyu so dnya rozhdeniya, Moscow, 2003, 191–207.
Shufrin A., “Razvitie ponyatiya «ipostas’» u VasiliyaVelikogo”, in: Problemy teologii, 2, 2006, 3–28.
Kryuchkov Timofei
Academic Degree: graduate student;
Place of work: Faculty of Philosophy, Moscow State University Shuvalovskii korpus MGU, Leninskie gory, 119234 Moscow, Russian Federation;
Email: email: timofeusk@yandex.ru.
Крючков Т. О. Имя и Церковь: ветхозаветное и раннехристианское почитание имени Божьего и философская ономатология А. Ф. Лосева // Вестник ПСТГУ. Серия I: Богословие. Философия. Религиоведение. 2022. Вып. 99. С. 76-90. DOI: 10.15382/sturI202299.76-90
The article examines the question of the theological origins of the philosophy named after A. F. Losev. The analysis shows that the notions of name as energy and name as cosmos are related to Losev's turning to the Old Testament and early Christian terminological traditions of using the concept of "Name" to convey the idea of the divine presence. As a result of accepting the Greek philosophical terminology on the part of the Christian Church, the idea of the divine presence in the created world began to be conveyed through the term of divine energy. A.F. Losev believes that the identification of the name and the signified thing is a sign of pre-philosophical mythological thinking in general. It gives a clue to the mentioned Old Testament tradition of the name divinity. Philosophical secular thinking fundamentally departs from such a religious worldview element. For this reason, philosophical and archaic worldviews can be seen in the two mentioned customs, which have been reflected in the theological terminology. The theological perception of the philosophical categorical system has not resulted in the complete displacement of "name" from the Christian theological discourse. The ancient Bible tradition of conveying the idea of the divine presence in the categories of "name" and "glory" is evident in a number of the holy fathers' works (St. Justin the Philosopher, St. John Chrysostom, St. Isaac of Nineveh). "Name" as a term close to the that of "energy" is more peculiar to Liturgical texts as A.F. Losev sees it. Losev's idea of God's name as the ontological energetic foundation of the cosmos, usually seen as a borrowing from Neoplatonism, goes back, among other things, to the doctrine of the church as the Body of Christ.
A. F. Losev, onomatodoxy, name, myth, energy, church, Cross, philosophy of the name, Neoplatonism
  1. Alfeev I. (2002) Sviashhennaia taina Tserkvi. Vvedenie v problematiku imiaslavskikh sporov. St. Petersburg (in Russian).
  2. Alfeev I. (ed.) (2010) Isaac Syrus. Disputatio 11, in Prepodobnyi Isaak Sirin. O bozhestvennykh tainakh i o dukhovnoi zhizni. Novootkrytye teksty, St Petersburg, pp. 138–148 (in Russian)..
  3. Chubukova E. (2005) “Problemy iazykovoi kommunikatsii v fi losofi i Platona i L. Vitgenshteina”, in ΑΚΑΔΗΜΕΙΑ: Materialy i issledovaniia po istorii platonizma, vol. 6, St. Petersburg, pp. 259– 280 (in Russian).
  4. D′iachkov A. (2013) “Imia i Krest”, in Ierusalimskii pravoslavnyi seminar. Vol. 4, Moscow, pp. 147–168 (in Russian).
  5. Danielou J. (1983) “La theologie du judeo-christianisme”. Simvol, vol. 9, pp. 16–32 (Russian translation).
  6. Gregory Palamas (2019) “Gomiliia o chestnom i zhivotvoriashchem Kreste”, in Sviatitel′ Grigorii Palama. Gomilii, Saratov, pp. 505–520.
  7. (1994) “Hermae Pastor”, in Pisaniia muzhei apostol′skikh. Riga, pp. 198–285.
  8. Khoruzhii S. (2003) “Imiaslavie i kul′tura serebrianogo veka: fenomen moskovskoi shkoly khristianskogo neoplatonizma”, in S. N. Bulgakov. Religiozno-filosofskii put′: Mezhdunarodnaia nauchnaia konferentsiia, posviashchionnaia 130-letiiu so dnia rozhdenija, Moscow, pp. 191–207 (in Russian).
  9. Iustinus Martyr (1995) “Dialogus cum Tryphone Judaeo”, in Sv. Iustin Filosof i muchenik. Tvoreniia, Moscow, pp.132 — 358 (in Russian).
  10. Leskin D. (2009) “SLOVO — SLAVA — PREMUDROST′: bogoslovsko-filosofskie osnovaniia vetkhozavetnoi onomatologii i aleksandriiskii iudaizm”. Gosudarstvo, religiia, tserkov′ v Rossii i za rubezhom, vol. 4 (27), pp. 165–175 (in Russian).
  11. Losev A. (1999) “Filosofiia imeni u Platona”, in A. Losev. Lichnost′ i Absoliut, Moscow, pp. 246–254 (in Russian).
  12. Losev A. (1999) “Veshch′ i imia (opyt primeneniia dialektiki k izucheniiu etnografi cheskogo materiala)”, in A. Losev. Lichnost′ i Absoliut, Moscow, pp. 331–335 (in Russian).
  13. Losev A. (2002) “Imiaslavie i platonizm”. Voprosy filosofii, vol. 9, pp. 102–129 (in Russian).
  14. Losev A. (1993) “Veshch′ i imia”, in A. Losev. Bytie. Imia. Kosmos, Moscow, pp. 802–880 (in Russian).
  15. Mesiats S. (ed.) (2012) Procli Diadochi in Platonis Timaeum commentaria. Moscow (Russian translation).
  16. Musokhranov G., Musokhranova L. (2017) “Vospriiatie bozhestvennykh imen kak sushhnostnykh energii v antichnom i vizantiiskom platonizme. Istoki imiaslavij a”. Teologiia. Filosofiia. Pravo, vol. 1 (1), pp. 17–45 (in Russian).
  17. Petrov A. (ed.) (2003) “Iz kommentariev Prokla k platonovskomu dialogu ÆKratil″”, in Fenomen teurgii: Vzaimodeistvie iazycheskoi fi losofi i i religioznoi praktiki v iellinistichesko-rimskii period, St. Petersburg, pp. 315–359 (in Russian).
  18. Ponomarev A. (2005) “Kreshchal′nye formuly Ævo imia″ v Novom Zavete: Obzor istorii issledovanii”. Vestnik PSTGU. Seriia I: Bogoslovie. Filosofiia, vol. 14, pp. 88–99 (in Russian).
  19. Shukurov D. (2019) “Printsipy nominatsii Boga v liturgicheskikh tekstakh Vostochnykh (oriental′nykh) tserkvei”. Litera, vol. 6, pp. 34–52 (in Russian).
Kryuchkov Timofey
ORCID: 0000-0003-1136-112X;
Email: timofeusk@yandex.ru.