/
Search results


Шпаковский М. В. Триадология Иосифа Волоцкого // Вестник ПСТГУ. Серия I: Богословие. Философия. Религиоведение. 2019. Вып. 85. С. 52-70. DOI: 10.15382/sturI201985.52-70
This article deals with the Trinitarian doctrine of Joseph Volotsky. This doctrine has not yet been described by scholars in a detailed and systematic way. The article shows that Joseph followed the traditional ontology of the Trinity, which he presented systematically in the fi rst section of Просветитель (Russ. ‘Enlightener’). In order to describe the general in the Trinity, he uses the terminological pair естество (‘nature’) and существо (‘substance’), and for the hypostases such terms as состав, собство, лице, образ, ипостась are used. In order to clarify the obscurities in the hegumen’s terminology, it was necessary to address the main patristic texts translated into Slavonic (Athanasius of Alexandria, Gregory of Nazianzus, John of Damascus), which allowed us to demonstrate important shades in the philosophical use of these words. It became clear that the similarity of terms related to hypostases goes back to Clement of Ochrid. The hegumen interprets the nature of the deity by means of apophatic myscticism, which conditioned signifi cant aspects of human knowledge of God. On the whole, in questions of Trinitarian ontology, Joseph takes quite a traditional position. Afterwards, the Enlightener with its doctrine was proclaimed “Luminary of Orthodoxy” at Moscow council against heretics of 1553‒54. The hegumen was also developing the topic of divine names, and in his reasoning the following types of names can be distinguished: (1) general, (2) hypostases, (3) common actions and properties in the Trinity. Joseph’s polemic with the Judaisers led him to revising the rational argumentation in favour of the existence of the Trinity based on analogy with the “image of God” in man. Joseph’s arguments are also interesting in that they make it possible to reconstruct some philosophical views of heretics and relate them to specifi c texts of the Judaisers. At the end of the article, the conclusion is made that the emergence of the triadology of Joseph Volotsky demonstrates that the intellectual level of culture of Moscow Rus’ rose considerably in the 16th century.
Ancient Rus’, Christianity, Josephites, Joseph Volotsky, Enlightener, Judaisers, divine names, patristics, triadology, Old Russian theology, Old Russian philosophy
  1. Alekseev A. (2010) Sochineniia Iosifa Volotskogo v kontekste polemiki 1480–1510 gg. [Writings of Joseph Volotsky in Context of Polemic of 1480‒1510]. St Petersburg (in Russian).
  2. Barankova G., Mil’kov V. (2001) Shestodnev Ioanna ekzarkha Bolgarskogo [The Hexaemeron of John the Exarch]. St Petersburg (in Russian).
  3. Bruni A. (2010) Vizantiiskaia traditsiia i staroslavianskii perevod Slov Grigoriia Nazianzina [Byzantine Tradition and Old Slavonic Translation of Gregory’s of Nazianzus Orationes], vol. 1. Moscow (in Russian).
  4. Fokin A. (2011) “Ratsional’nye metody obosnovaniia Bozhestvennoi Troichnosti v zapadnoi i vostochnoi patristike” [Rationalist Methods of Substantiating the Divine Trinity in Western and Eastern Patristics]. Filosofiia religii: al’manakh 2010–2011. Moscow. Pp. 95–115 (in Russian).
  5. Goltz H., Prochorov G. (eds) (2011) Das Corpus des Dionysios Areiopagites in der slavischen Übersetzung von Starec Isaij a (14. Jahrhundert) (= Monumenta linguae slavicae dialecti veteris, 56), Bd. 2. Freiburg i. Br.
  6. Kazakova N., Lur’e Ia. (1955) Antifeodal’nye ereticheskie dvizheniia na Rusi XIV — nachala XVI veka [Antifeudal Heretic Movements in Rus’ of the 14th — Early 16th Centuries]. Moscow; Leningrad (in Russian).
  7. Kamchatnov A. (1992) “O simvolicheskom istolkovanii semanticheskoi evoliutsii slov litse i obraz” [On Symbolic Interpretation of Semantic Evolution of the Words litse and obraz]. Germenevtika drevnerusskoi literatury. XI–XIV vv., 5. Moscow. Pp. 285–299 (in Russian).
  8. Kamchatnov A. (ed.) (2002) Paleia Tolkovaia. Moscow (in Russian).
  9. Kliment Okhridski (1970, 1977). Sbrani schineniia [Selected Works], vols 1, 2. Sofiia (in Bulgarian).
  10. Kriza Á. (2011) A középkori orosz képvédő irodalom I: Bizánci források — Drevnerusskie teksty v zashchitu ikon, chast’ 1: Vizantiiskoe nasledie [Ancient Russian Texts in Defence of Icons, Part 1: Byzantine Legacy]. Budapest.
  11. Lytvynenko V. (2015) “Anti-Arian Arguments in the Iosif Volotskij ’s Polemic against the Judaisers”. Parresia Revue pro vý chodní kř esť anství . A Journal of Eastern Christian Studies, 9–10, pp. 53–75.
  12. Lytvynenko V. (2018) “Selective Textual Evidence as a Case for a Single Translator of Athanasius’ Orations Against the Arians into Old Slavonic”. SLOVO, Journal of the Old Church Slavonic Institute, 68, pp. 199–226.
  13. Okhotnikova V. (2007) Pskovskaia agiografi ia XIV–XVII vv.: Issledovaniia i teksty [Pskov Hagiography of the 14th — 17th Centuries. Studies and Texts], in 2 vols. St Petersburg (in Russian).
  14. Petrov V. (2007) Maksim Ispovednik: ontologiia i metod v vizantiiskoi fi losofi i VII v [Maximus the Confessor: Ontology and Method in Byzantine Philosophy of the 7th Century]. Moscow (in Russian).
  15. Prokhorov G., Miklas X., Bil’diug A. (eds) (2008) “Dioptra” Filippa Monotropa: antropologicheskaia entsiklopediia pravoslavnogo Srednevekov’ia [Dioptra by Philip Monotropos: Anthropological Encyclopaedia of Orthodox Middle Ages]. Moscow (in Russian).
  16. Rykov Iu., Turilov A. (1984) “Neizvestnyi epizod bolgarsko-vizantiisko-russkih sviazei XI v.: Kievskii pisatel’ Grigorii Filosof” [Unknown Episode of Bulgarian-Byzantine‒Russian Links of the 11th Century: Kievan Writer Grigoriy the Philosopher]. Drevneishie gosudarstva na territorii SSSR: Materialy i issledovaniia, 1982. Moscow. Pp. 170–176 (in Russian).
  17. Sapozhnikova O. (2008) “Bogoslovie Ioanna Damaskina v sostave drevnerusskikh sbornikov XV v. i Florentiiskaia uniia” [Theology of John of Damascus in Old Russian Collections of the 15th Centiry and the Florentine Union]. Vizantiiskii vremennik, 67 (92), pp. 117–141 (in Russian).
  18. Sapozhnikova O. (2013) “«Bogoslovie» Ioanna Damaskina i voprosy tsitirovaniia v «Prosvetitele» Iosifa Volotskogo” [Theology of John of Damascus and Problems of Quoting in the Enlightener by Joseph Volotsky]. Vestnik Novosibirskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. «Istoriia, filologiia», 12 (2), pp. 177–187 (in Russian).
  19. Smirnova D. (2014) “K publikatsii poslaniia novgorodskogo arkhiepiskopa Feodosiia (1542– 1551 gg.) k novoprosveshchennym lopianam” [On the Publication of the Epistle of Feodosiy, the Archbishop of Novgorod (1542‒1551), to the Newly-Enlightened Laplanders]. Vestnik Udmurtskogo universiteta. «Istoriia i filologiia», 1, pp. 154–159 (in Russian).
  20. Taube M. (1994) “The Spiritual Circle in the Secret of Secrets and the Poem on the Soul”. Harvard Ukrainian Studies, 18 (3/4). P. 342–355.
  21. Taube M. (1997) “Posleslovie k «Logicheskim terminam» Maimonida i eres’ zhidovstvuiushchikh” [Afterword to the Terms of Logic by Maimonid and the Heresy of the Judaisers], in: In memoriam: Sbornik pamiati S. Ia. Lur’e [Collection of Papers in Memory of S. Ia. Lur’ye]. St. Petersburg. Pp. 239–246 (in Russian).
  22. Taube M. (1995) “The “Poem on the Soul” in the Laodicean Epistle and the Literature of the Judaizers”. Harvard Ukrainian Studies, 19, pp. 671–685.
  23. Trefandilov Kh. (1998) “«Bogoslovie» Ioanna Damaskina v perevode Ioanna Ekzarkha Bolgarskogo («Nebesa») i original’nye proizvedeniia drevnerusskoi literatury XI–XVI vv.” [Theology by John of Damascus Translated by John the Exarch (“Heaven”) and Original Texts of Old Russian Literature of the 11th — 16th Centuries], in: Preslavska knizhovna shkol, vol. 3, pp. 85–119 (in Russian).
  24. Weiher E. (ed.) (2017) Die altbulgarische Übersetzung der Katechesen Kyrills von Jerusalem (= Monumenta linguae slavicae dialecti veteris, 64) (GIM Sin. 478). Freiburg i. Br.
  25. Weiher E., Šmidt S., Škurko A. (eds) (2007) Die Grossen Lesemenäen Des Metropoliten Makarij . Uspenskij Spisok (= Monumenta linguae slavicae dialecti veteris, 51). Freiburg i. Br.
  26. Zamaleev A. (1998) Vostochnoslavianskie mysliteli: Epokha Srednevekov’ia [East Slavonic Thinkers: Period of Middle Ages]. St Petersburg (in Russian).
  27. Zimin A., Lur’e Ia. (eds) (1959) Poslaniia Iosifa Volotskogo [Epistles of Josepf Volotsky]. Moscow; Leningrad (in Russian).
Shpakovskiy Mikhail
Student status: Master's Degree Student;
Place of study: Institute of Philosophy of the Russian Academy of Sciences; 12/1 Goncharnaya Str., Moscow, 109240, Russian Federation;
Post: Junior Research Fellow Department of Philosophy of Religion;
ORCID: 0000-0002-0905-2988;
Email: shpakomih@mail.ru.
Шпаковский М. В. Естественная теология Зиновия Отенского в контексте древнерусской философской книжности // Вестник ПСТГУ. Серия I: Богословие. Философия. Религиоведение. 2020. Вып. 92. С. 35-56. DOI: 10.15382/sturI202092.35-56
This article deals with the fi rst Russian proofs of God’s existence which were proposed by Zinovy Otensky in the Demonstration of the Truth. The author of the article believes that F. V. Kalugin’s and R. Mainka’s studies are not comprehensive. They did not take into account the historical and philosophical context of these proofs and therefore could not give an evaluation that would be relevant to the historical context. This article evaluates each of Zinovy’s proofs following the reconstruction of his philosophical views. The description of the latter is made more precise, which allows one to identify their sources in the philosophical booklore of Ancient Rus’ and to reconstruct the relevant historical and philological background of these proofs. Zinovy himself proposed fi ve proofs of God’s existence. They were designed to disprove the theory of independent emergence of all being which was ascribed to the famous heretic Theodosius Kosoy. Zinovy’s proofs have a syllogistic structure and a detailed substantiation of the prerequisites. Proof 1: all kinds of living beings are created. This proof is founded on the principle of immutability of created species which goes back to the 2nd Oration against the Arians by Athanasius of Alexandria. Proof 2: all being was created. This argument draws on the conception of motion and rest going back to Aristotle. This doctrine is expounded in the Dialectics by John of Damascus and in scholia on the Corpus Areopagiticum. Proof 3: man knows and seeks God by nature. This elaborates one of the statements of Damascene’s Theology. Proof 4: all beings are subject to passions and change and therefore could not appear independently. This proof is illustrated by the texts that contain Aristotelian doctrine of motion and aff ect. Proof 5: the order of the four elements evidences the presence of the Arranging One. This proof is based on the classical theory of elements and their order and harmony. The article concludes that Zinovy’s philosophical views were infl uenced by the tradition of Aristoteles Slavicus. One can claim that proofs 1 and 2 are original, whereas 3, 4, 5 are original developments of Greek prototypes.
Ancient Rus’, Christianity, Zinovy Otensky, Demonstration of the truth, natural theology, Aristoteles Slavicus, patristics, medieval philosophy, Old Russian theology, Old Russian philosophy
  1. Anisimova T. (2016) “V poiskakh avtografa Zinoviia Otenskogo” [Looking for the autograph of Zinovy Otensky]. Observatoriia kul’tury, 13, 6, p. 736–745 (in Russian).
  2. Barankova G., Mil’kov V. (2001) Shestodnev Ioanna ekzarkha Bolgarskogo [The Hexaemeron of John the Exarch]. St. Petersburg (in Russian).
  3. Bogatova G. (ed.) (2002) Slovar’ russkogo iazyka XI–XVII vv. [Dictionary of the Russian Language of the 11th — 17th centuries], vol. 26. Moscow (in Russian).
  4. Dmitriev M. (1998) Dissidents russes. I. Feodosii Kosoi. Baden-Baden.
  5. Eremin I. (1956) “Literaturnoe nasledie Kirilla Turovskogo” [Literary heritage of Kirill Turovsky], in Trudy Otdela drevnerusskoi literatury, 12, p. 340–362 (in Russian).
  6. Fokin A. (2019) “Argument ot sensus divinitatis i istoricheskii argument v pol’zu sushchestvovaniia Boga v istorii patristicheskoi mysli” [The Argument from Sensus Divinitatis and the historical argument for the existence of God in the history of patristic thought]. Trudy kafedry bogosloviya SPBDA, 1 (3), p. 17‒32 (in Russian).
  7. Gavrushin N. (2003) Premudraia sviataia dialektika. «Filosofskie glavy» prepodobnogo Ioanna Damaskina na Rusi [Wise and holy dialectics. “The Philosophical Chapters» by John of Damascus in Ancient Rus’]. N. Novgorod (in Russian).
  8. Goltz H., Prochorov G. (eds) (2011) Das Corpus des Dionysios Areiopagites in der slavischen Übersetzung von Starec Isaija (14. Jahrhundert). Bd. 2. Freiburg i. Br..
  9. Koretskii V. (1965) “Vnov’ naidennoe protivoereticheskoe proizvedenie Zinoviia Otenskogo” [Newly found antiheretical work of Zinovy Otensky], in Trudy Otdela drevnerusskoi literatury, 12, p. 162–182 (in Russian).
  10. Lytvynenko V. (ed.) (2019) Athanasius of Alexandria. Oratio II contra Arianos: Old Slavonic Version and English Translation. Turnhout: Brepols. (Patrologia Orientalis, Volume 248).
  11. Lytvynenko V. (ed.) (2019) Athanasius of Alexandria. Oratio II contra Arianos: Old Slavonic Version and English Translation. Turnhout: Brepols. (Patrologia Orientalis, Volume 248).
  12. Mainka R. M. (1961) Zinovij von Oten’: Ein russischer Polemiker und Theologe der Mitte des 16. Jh. Rome.
  13. Morozova L. (1975) “Voprosy atributsii «Poslaniya mnogoslovnogo», polemicheskogo proizvedeniia XVI v.” [The attribution of “Poslanie mnogoslovnoe”, a polemical work of the 16th century]. Istoriia SSSR, 1, p. 101–109 (in Russian).
  14. Prokhorov G., Miklas H., Bil’dug A. (eds) (2008) “Dioptra” Filippa Monotropa: antropologicheskaia entsiklopediia pravoslavnogo Srednevekov’ia [The “Dioptra” by Fhilip Monotrop. The antropological encyclopaedia of the Orthodox middle ages]. Moscow (in Russian).
  15. Trefandilov H. (1998) ““Bogoslovie” Ioanna Damaskina v perevode Ioanna Ekzarkha Bolgarskogo (“Nebesa”) i original’nye proizvedeniia drevnerusskoi literatury XI–XVI vv.” [“Theology” of John of Damascus in John the Exarch’s translation and the original works of Old Russian literature of the 11th — 16th centuries]. Preslavska knizhovna shkola, 3, p. 85–119 (in Russian).
  16. Zubov V. (ed.) (2019) Logika Aviasafa. Trudy po istorii religiozno-fi losofskoj mysli i nauki Drevnei Rusi [The Logic of Aviasaf. Works on the history of Old Russian religious and philosophical thought]. Moscow (in Russian).
Shpakovskiy Mikhail
Student status: Master's Degree Student;
Place of study: Institute of Philosophy of the Russian Academy of Sciences; 12/1 Goncharnaya Str., Moscow, 109240, Russian Federation;
Post: Junior Research Fellow Department of Philosophy of Religion;
ORCID: 0000-0002-0905-2988;
Email: shpakomih@mail.ru.