St. Tikhon’s University Review . Series I: Theology. Philosophy. Religious Studies

The master’s dissertation of prince Yevgeny Trubetskoy “Worldview of St. Augustine”, which was written in 1891, became a notable event in Russian studies of Augustine. The aim of Trubetsoy was to carry out detailed and unbiased research and to draw a conclusion about the place and role of St. Augustine in the history of Western civilisation. The main point of his research is that St. Augustine should rather be regarded as the father of the “Latin idea” than father of the church in a broad sense. This is due to the fact that Augustine extremely strictly followed the judicial understanding of the evangelical doctrine and forceful arrangement of church life. Attentive reading of the disseration suggests that the main source of the core of Trubetskoy’s conclusions were studies of his elder friend, Vladimir Solovyev. But the major interest in this case is that we can trace a parallelism between the inner evolution of St. Augustine (as it is refl ected in Trubetskoy’s dissertation) and Solovyev, who at the end of the 1880s experienced fondness for Catholicism and was developing the idea of the reunion of the churches. The article also duscusses the hypothesis that this parallelism was not accidental but made up a signifi cant part of Trubetskoy’s plan and back-infl uenced his reading of St. Augustine’s texts.

St. Augustine, Yevgeny Trubetskoy, Vladimir Solovyev, the Latin idea, A. S. Homyakov, Godmanhood, grace and freedom

1. Evlampiev I. I. (2004) “Trudy Evgeniya Trubeckogo po istorii hristianskoj mysli” [“Eugene Trubetskoy’s Studies on the History of Christian Thought”], in Trubetskoy E. N. Religiozno-obshchestvennyj ideal zapadnogo hristianstva [Religious and Social Ideal of Western Christianity]. St Petersburg, pp. 5‒26 (in Russian).
2. Feofan Zatvornik (2003) Put’ ko spaseniyu [Road to Salvation]. Moscow (in Russian).
3. Homyakov A. S. (1995) Sochineniya bogoslovskie [Theological Works]. St Petersburg (in Russian).
4. Keidan V. I. (ed.) (1997) Vzyskuyushchie grada. Hronika chastnoj zhizni russkih religioznyh filosofov v pis’mah i dnevnikah [In Quest of the City. Chronicle of Private Life of Russian Religious Philosophers in Letters and Diaries]. Moscow (in Russian).
5. Khondzinskii P. (2012) “Uchenie svyatitelya Feofana o blagodati i “chistoj lyubvi” v kontekste idej blzh. Avgustina” [“St. Theophan’s Doctrine of Grace and “Pure Love” in Context of St. Augustine’s Ideas”]. Vestnik PSTGU. Seriia 1. Bogoslovie. Filosofiya, 2012, vol. 44, pp. 21‒29 (in Russian).
6. Solov’ev V. S. (1991) Rossiya i Vselenskaya Cerkov’ [Russia and Oecumenical Church]. Moscow (in Russian).
7. Ratzinger J. (1992) Volk und Haus Gottes in Augustinus Lehre von der Kirche. München.

Khondzinskii Pavel, archpriest

Article is prepared within the "Blessed Augustine of Hippo in the philosophicaltheological and cultural dialogue of the traditions of East and West" project with assistance of Fund of development of St. Tikhon’s Orthodox University.

This article investigates the problems which arise when the concept of possible worlds is applied to modal and existential judgments about God. In presentday logic, philosophy and linguistics, modal statements are conventionally understood as coordinating the situation described or relationships between situations with possible worlds. Existential statements are in this case seen as coordinating what is being stated by default with reality. But a judgment about God does not always imply a link between His existence or His possession of certain properties and some concrete world or even the whole array of possible worlds. Having studied the problem, the author of the paper has come to the conclusion that semantics of possible worlds is compatible with preferable (from the point of view of theism) readings of diffi cult cases of the type in question if one of the two requirements is met, namely if these statements are not assigned the sense of the truth or they are understood as hidden metaphors.

semantics, God, possible world, theism, modality, existence, necessity, conditions of being true, meaning, metaphor, creation

1. Adams R. (1974) “Theories of Actuality”. Nous, 1974, vol. 8, pp. 211–231.
2. Armstrong D. M. (1989) A Combinatorial Theory of Possibility. Cambridge.
3. Bocharov V. A., Markin V. I. (2008) Vvedeniye v logiku: universitetskiy kurs [Introduction to Logics: University Course]. Moscow (in Russian).
4. Cohen T. (1975) “Figurative Speech and Figurative Acts”. Journal of Philosophy, 1975, vol. 72, pp. 669–684.
5. Davidson D. (1984) “What Metaphors Mean”, in Davidson D. Inquiries into Truth and Interpretation. Oxford, pp. 245–264.
6. Feys R. (1974) Modal’naya logika [Modal Logic]. Moscow (in Russian).
7. Frege G. (1997) “Smysl i znacheniye”, in: Frege G. Izbrannyye raboty [Selected Works], Moscow, pp. 25–49 (in Russian).
8. Kripke S. A. (1980) Naming and Necessity. Cambridge (MA).
9. Lewis D. (1973) Counterfactuals. Oxford.
10. Menzel C. (2016) “Possible Worlds”, in Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, available at: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/possible-worlds/#AbsModIntEnt (21.05.2018).
11. Nolan D. (2016) “Modal Fictionalism”, in Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, available at: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fi ctionalism-modal/#ThePriModFic (20.05.2018).
12. Plantinga A. (1974) The Nature of Necessity. Oxford.
13. Plantinga A. (1987) “Two Concepts of Modality: Modal Realism and Modal Reductionism”, in: Tomberlin J. (ed.) Philosophical Perspectives, 1: Metaphysics. Atascadero, pp. 189–231.
14. Rosen G. (1990) “Modal Fictionalism”. Mind, 1990, vol. 99, pp. 327–354.
15. Stalnaker R. C. (1976) “Possible Worlds”. Nous, 1976, vol. 10.1, pp. 65–75.
16. Tarski A. (1944) “The semantic conception of truth”. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 1944, vol. 4, pp. 341–376.

Chernyak Alexey

*According to the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) 2011, the degree of Candidate of Sciences (Cand.Sc.) belongs to ISCED level 8 — "doctoral or equivalent", together with PhD, DPhil, D.Lit, D.Sc, LL.D, Doctorate or similar.

Veretennikov Andrey

*According to the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) 2011, the degree of Candidate of Sciences (Cand.Sc.) belongs to ISCED level 8 — "doctoral or equivalent", together with PhD, DPhil, D.Lit, D.Sc, LL.D, Doctorate or similar.

This article outlines the possible sources from which Kant was familiar with the doctrine of transcendentals and based on which he has developed his own concept of the transcendental. Taking these sources into account, the article scrutinises the critique of transcendentals in the Critique of Pure Reason. Kant asserts there that unum, verum and bonum do not disturb the completedness of his table of categories. Due to the fact that Kant even in theoretical philosophy does not employ the thesis on the convertibility of the existing and the good, this thesis is also lacking in his practical philosophy. Not only does Kant abandon the doctrine of transcendentals, but very moderately uses his new consept of the transcendental in the ethics. Kant’s ethics, as it is, does not need in its existence either religion or ontological grounds if one understands them as certain supracategorical attributes of being.

transcendentals, the good, ontology, transcendental cosmology, ethics, Kant, Wolff , A. G. Baumgarten

1. Aertsen J. A., Honnefelder L., Möhle H., Leinsle U. G., Hinske N., Cesa C., König G., Poggi S., Ollig H.-L., Lembeck K.-H., Niquet M., Trappe T. (1998) “Transzendental”; “das Transzendentale”; “Transzendentalien”; “Transzendentalphilosophie”, in Ritter J., Gründer K. (eds.) Historisches Wörterbuch der Philosophie, Basel, vol. 10, pp. 1412–1420.
2. Baumgarten A. G. (2012) Metafizika [Metaphysics]. Einai, vol. 1 (1).
3. Casula M. (1979) “Die Beziehung Wolff –Thomas–Carbo in der Metaphysica latina. Zur Quellengeschichte der Thomas-Rezeption bei Christian Wolff ”. Studia leibnitiana, vol. 11.
4. Feofilakt Lopatinskii (1997) “Dialektika” [“Dialectics”], in Izbrannye filosofskie proizvedeniia [Selected Philosophical Works]. Moscow (in Russian).
5. Gawlick G., Kreimendahl L. (eds.) (2011) Baumgarten, A. G. Metaphysica = Metaphysik. Historisch-kritische Ausgabe. Stuttgart.
6. Hinske N. (1968) “Die historischen Vorlagen der Kantischen Transzendentalphilosophie”. Archiv für Begriff sgeschichte, vol. 12.
7. Hinske N. (1970) “Verschiedenheit und Einheit der transzendentalen Philosophie”. Archiv für Begriff sgeschichte, vol. 14.
8. Hinske N. (1970) Kants Weg zur Transzendentalphilosophie. Der dreißigjährige Kant. Stuttgart.
9. Hinske N. (1998) “Transzendental“, in Ritter J., Gründer K. (eds.). Historisches Wörterbuch der Philosophie, Basel, vol. 10.
10. Hinske N. (2012). “Ontologiia ili analitika rassudka? Dolgoe rasstavanie Kanta s ontologiei” [“Ontology or Analytics of Understanding? Kant’s Long Farwell to Ontology”]. Istoriko-filosofskii ezhegodnik, 2011, pp. 233–241 (in Russian).
11. Honnefelder L. (1990) Scientia transcendens: die formale Bestimmung der Seiendheit und Realität in der Metaphysik des Mittelalters und der Neuzeit (Duns Scotus – Suárez – Wolff – Kant – Peirce). Hamburg.
12. Kant I. (1983) Kritik der reinen Vernunft, in Werke in 10 Bänden, Darmstadt, vol. 3‒4.
13. Kant I. (1994) Kritika chistogo razuma [Critique of Pure Reason]. Moscow (Russian Translation).
14. Kant I. (1970) “Metaphysik von Schön”, in Königlich preußische Akademie der Wissenschaften (ed.) Kant’s Gesammelte Schriften. Berlin, vol. 28.
15. Kopper J. (1981) “Einige Bemerkungen zu §12 der Kritik der reinen Vernunft”. Revue internationale de philosophie, vol. 136–137, p. 255.
16. Martin G. (1958) Immanuel Kant. Ontologie und Wissenschaftstheorie. Köln.
17. Motroshilova N. V., Tushling B. (eds.) (1997) Kant I. Sochineniia na nemetskom i russkom iazykakh [Kant I. Writings in German and Russian]. Moscow, vol. 3 (in Russian).
18. Tetens J. N. (2013) O vseobshchei spekuliativnoi filosofii [On General Speculative Philosophy]. Moscow (in Russian)
19. Thomas Aquinas (2006). Summa teologii [Summa Theologiae]. Moscow, vol. 1 (Russian Translation).
20. Tommasi F. V. (2008) Philosophia transcendentalis. La questione antepredicativa e l’analogia trala Scolastica e Kant. Firenze.
21. Vries J. de. (1955) “Kantische und thomistische Erkenntnistheorie”, in Lotz J. B. (ed.) Kant und die Scholastik heute. Pullach.
22. Wolff Chr. (2001) “Razumnye mysli o Boge, mire i dushe cheloveka, a takzhe o vsekh veshchakh voobshche, soobshchennye liubiteliam istiny Khristianom Vol’fom” [“Rational Thoughts on God, the World and the Soul of Man, and on All Things Whatsoever”], in Zhuchkov V. A. (ed.) Khristian Vol’f i filosofiia v Rossii [Christian Wolff and Philosophy in Russia]. St Petersburg, 2001 (in Russian).

Kruglov Alexei

*According to ISCED 2011, a post-doctoral degree called Doctor of Sciences (D.Sc.) is given to reflect second advanced research qualifications or higher doctorates.

In modern Western theology, there is a widespread idea that the formula etsi Deus non daretur (“as if God did not exist”) appears for the fi rst time in works of Hugo Grotius (1583–1645) and marks the advent of a new secular worldview, according to which the world and man are autonomous and independent from the transcendental God. Nevertheless, historical facts show that this formula was in use as early as the 14th century and repeatedly occurred in works of Catholic scholastics (such as Gabriel Biel, Domingo de Soto, Francisco Suarez, etc.). The author’s opinion is that this formula is nothing more than a mental experiment which was employed in the dispute about the nature of the natural moral law between Christian objectivists and voluntarists. The objectivists who used this experiment defended the idea that the principles of morality (in the form of the natural law) are rooted in human nature itself so fi rmly that their existence and validity do not depend on the presence or absence of any divine commandments and prohibitions. It is in this sense that the aforementioned formula should be understood; even if per impossibile there was no God, the principles of morality would exist in man and would be expressed in the dictates of common sense (recta ratio). This, however, does not in any way imply a denial of the existence of God or even a doubt about it: the mental experiment remains just a mental experiment; as for the rest, the objectivists (including Grotius) emphasised that the nature of man together with the natural moral law embedded in it are what they are only because such was the will of God the Creator.

Hugo Grotius, Gregory of Rimini, Francisco Suarez, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, scholasticism, natural law, Christian theology, secularism, theism

1. Bonhoeff er D. (1994) Soprotivlenie i pokornost’ [Resistance and Obedience]. Moscow (in Russian).
2. Chroust A. H. (1943) “Hugo Grotius and the Scholastic Natural Law Tradition”. The New Scholasticism, 1943, vol. 17, pp. 101–133.
3. Dilthey W. (1922) Gesammelte Schriften. Berlin.
4. Frick Р. (2008) Bonhoeff er’s Intellectual Formation: Theology and Philosophy in His Thought. Tübingen.
5. Gabriel Biel (1984) Collectorium circa quattuor libros Sententiarum. Liber secundus. Tübingen.
6. Gregorius Ariminensis (1980) Lectura super Primum et Secundum Sententiarum. Berlin, New York, vol. 6.
7. Guillelmus de Ockham (1980–1981). Opera philosophica et theologica. Opera theologica. New York.
8. Leger, M. M. J. St. (1962) The “Etiamsi Daremus” of Hugo Grotius. Rome.
9. McGrath, A. E. (ed.) (2016) The Christian Theology Reader. Malden (MA).
10. Milbank J. (2008) “Politicheskaja teologij a i novaja nauka politiki” [“Political Theology and New Political Science”]. Logos, 2008, vol. 4 (67), pp. 33–54 (in Russian).
11. Uzlaner D. (2008), “Raskoldovyvanie diskursa: Religioznoe i svetskoe v jazike novogo vremeni” [“Disenchantment of Discourse: the Religious and the Secular in Language of New Time]. Logos, 2008, vol. 4 (67), pp. 140–159.

Appolonov Alexey

*According to the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) 2011, the degree of Candidate of Sciences (Cand.Sc.) belongs to ISCED level 8 — "doctoral or equivalent", together with PhD, DPhil, D.Lit, D.Sc, LL.D, Doctorate or similar.

This paper puts forward and provides grounds for the two following statements: 1) The thesis about the convertibility of the existing and the good formulated in scholastic tradition can be regarded as quite a natural inference from the perfectionist conception of good, which was one of the most infl uential axiological theories in the history of European thought from Plato up to the Enlightenment; 2) Since this classical version of perfectionism is a radically objectivist axiological theory, this thesis can also be characterised as radically objectivist and, therefore, its relevance depends on the basic choice between objectivism and subjectivism in axiology. In order to substantiate the fi rst statement, I off er a brief outline of the basic principles of perfectionist axiology. Then I demonstrate that the thesis about good and being being convertible can be rather easily deduced from these premises. In order to substantiate the second statement, I argue that despite some general diffi culties in distinguishing between objectivism and subjectivism in axiology, one can rather unambiguously single out what may be called “radically objectivist” theories (i.e. those implying that at least some values can exist without any subjective consciousness whatsoever), and, since classical perfectionism belongs to this type of theories, the inferences from them, such as the thesis in question, can make no sense within subjectivist axiological framework.

axiology, being, good, goodness, hedonism, Moore, objectivism, perfectionism, Sidgwick, subjectivism, Thomas Aquinas

1. Bobonich С. (2002) Plato’s Utopia Recast. His Later Ethics and Politics. New York.
2. Feldman F. (2004) Pleasure and the Good Life. Oxford.
3. Grahek N. (2007) Feeling Pain and Being in Pain. Cambridge.
4. Hurka T. (1993) Perfectionism. New York.
5. Lobkovits N., Apollonov A. V. (eds.) (2006, 2008) Sv. Foma Akvinskii. Summa teologii [Summa Theologiae]. Moscow (in Russian).
6. Losev A. F. et al. (eds.) (1994) Platon. Sobranie sochinenii v 4 t. [Plato. Works in 4 Volumes]. Moscow (in Russian).
7. MacDonald S. (ed.) (1991) Being and Goodness: The Concept of the Good in Metaphysics and Philosophical Theology. London.
8. Moore G. E. (1993) Principia Ethica. Cambridge.
9. Parfi t D. (2011) On What Matters. New York.
10. Santas G. (2001) Goodness and Justice. Plato, Aristotle and the Moderns. Oxford.
11. Schmitt F. S. (ed.) (1946) S. Anselmi Cantuariensis archiepiscopi opera omnia. Edinburgh.

Seregin Andrei

*According to the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) 2011, the degree of Candidate of Sciences (Cand.Sc.) belongs to ISCED level 8 — "doctoral or equivalent", together with PhD, DPhil, D.Lit, D.Sc, LL.D, Doctorate or similar.

This article deals with a systematic description of the features of Cicero’s religiology which can be found in De natura deorum; no other works of Cicero are taken into consideration. It compares the etymology of the term religio proposed by the philosopher and his views on religion itself. The author of the article comes to the conclusion that the dualism in Cicero’s attitude to religion does not correlate with the etymology in question, due to which it seems to be non-constructive. While he states that religion is an integral part of the state system of the Roman Empire and tends to assign it a nature of cult, Cicero considers religion in the exact sense to be a domain of those who treat it in a rational way, thus coming into contradiction and, as a matter of fact, replacing religion with superstitions. The author of the article also considers E. Benveniste’s arguments in favour of Cicero’s etymology and pays attention to diffi culties in deriving religio from legere, noting that Lactantius’ etymology, which is seen by many as exclusively Christian, may have a broader context. Though one should not totally exclude the possibility of deriving the word religio from relegere as well as religare, the proposed arguments point to certain inconsistencies in Benveniste’s reasoning and, taking into account Cicero’s diff eretiation between religio and superstitio, demonstrate that the available prerequisites of considering Cicero’s etymology to be universally accepted might appear not very well-grounded.

religiology, Cicero, religion, Lactantius, relegere, religare, Benveniste, etymology

1. Benveniste E. (1995) Slovar’ indoevropeiskikh sotsial’nykh terminov [Dictionary of Indo-European Social Terms]. Moscow (Russian Translation).
2. Berkova E. (1958) “Tsitseron kak kritik sueverii” [“Cicero as a Critic of Superstitions”], in Tsitseron: Sbornik statei. Moscow (in Russian).
3. Maiorov G. (1989) Tsitseron i antichnaia fi losofi ia religii [Cicero and Ancient Philosophy of Religion]. Moscow (in Russian).
4. Marcus Tullius Cicero. (1985) Filosofskie traktaty [Treatises on Philosophy]. Moscow.
5. Petersmann H. (2002) “ΕÁσέβεια, θρησκεία and religio. An etymological analysis of three disputed terms. Lingua et Religio”, in Heßen B. (ed.) Augewählte Kleine Schriften zur antiken Religionsgeschichte auf sprachwissenschaftlicher Grundlage. Göttingen.
6. Rackham A. (transl.) (1956) Marcus Tullius Cicero. De natura deorum: Academica. Cambridge.
7. Rendich F. (2013) Comparative Etymological Dictionary of Classical Indo-European languages: Indo-European – Sanskrit – Greek – Latin. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform.
8. Scheid J. (2006) Religiia rimlian [Religion of Romans]. Moscow (in Russian).
9. Shokhin V. K. (2010) “«Filosofiia religii»: stanovlenie avtorefl eksii” [“Philosophy of Religion and Development of Self-Refl ection”], in: Filosofiia religii: Al’manakh 2008–2009 [Philosophy of Religion: Almanach, 2008‒2009], pp. 16–38.
10. Vaan M. de. (2008) Etymological Dictionary of Latin and the other Italic Languages. Leiden.
11. Veviurko I. S. (2014) “Filosofiia religii u Aristotelia” [“Aristotle’s Philosophy of Religion”]. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Ser. 7. Filosofiia, 2014, vol. 6, pp. 86–99.

Shperl Ksenia

This article is devoted to the previously unknown translation of the book of the German philosopher Johann Wachter Elucidarius cabbalisticus. This book deals with philosophy of Benedict Spinoza, which the author understands in connection with Jewish mysticism, Kabbalah. The translation into Russian was made by Semen Novikov in 1820 but remained unpublished. The article expounds on the content of the manuscript; the manuscript itself is being examined in the broad context of Masonic literature of the 18th — 19th centuries related to Kabbalah. The main idea of Wahter’s book is that Kabbalah is an ancient doctrine, a certain form of primordial philosophy or wisdom that is transmitted by the Jews. It is transmitted secretly, in order to avoid profanisation. Spinoza’s philosophy is a form of the elite Kabbalah, the origin of which he was concealing, avoiding Hebrew and unnecessary references to Kabbalistic texts. The main match of Spinoza and Kabbalah is in the formula: “Nature is God, but God is not nature”. The translation made by Semen Novikov is a clear evidence of interest in Jewish mysticism among Russian thinkers of the early 19th century. It demonstrates the fact that Russian Freemasons not only were the agents of western values and western philosophy but were also the fi rst to have conceptualised in Russian a signifi cant amount of European humanities, part of which is Kabbalah.

Spinoza, Kabbalah, Jewish mysticism, Johann Wachter, Freemasonry, history of Freemasonry in Russia, philosophy of Spinoza, Theophan Prokopovich, Jewish philosophy, esotericism, tradition

1. Antonov K. M. (2014) “Predislovie. Osnovnyie problemyi izucheniya istorii religiovedeniya sovetskogo vremeni” [“Foreword. The Main Problems of Studying the History of Religious Studies of Soviet Times”], in Antonov K. M. (ed.) “Nauka o religii”, “nauchnyiy ateizm”, “religiovedenie”: aktualnyie problemyi nauchnogo izucheniya religii v Rossii XX — nachala XXI v. [“Science of Religion”, “scientifi c atheism”, “religious studies”: Actual Problems of Scientifi c Study of Religion in Russia of the XX — early XXI century]. Moscow, pp. 5–26 (in Russian).
2. Bayer N. (2007) Spreading the light: European Freemasonry and Russia in the eighteenth century. Нouston.
3. Beltran M. (2016) The Influence of Abraham Cohen de Herrera’s Kabbalah on Spinoza’s Metaphysics. Leiden.
4. Bragina L. M. (ed.) (1999) Istoriya kul’tury stran Zapadnoj Evropy v ehpohu Vozrozhdeniya [History of Culture of West European Countries in the Period of Renaissance]. Moscow (in Russian).
5. Burmistrov K., Endel M. (2004) “The Place of Kabbalah in the Doctrine of Russian Masons”. Aries: Journal for the Study of Western Esotericism, 2004, vol. 4/1, pp. 27–68.
6. Burmistrov K. (2013) Evropejskaya filosofiya i kabbala. Istoriya, problemy, vliyaniya [European Philosophy and Kabbalah. History, Problems, Infl uences]. Moscow (in Russian).
7. Burmistrov K. (2010) “The Kabbalah As Primordial Tradition In Russian Secret Societies”, in Constructing Tradition Means and Myths of Transmission in Western Esotericism, Leiden.
8. Burmistrov K. Yu. (2003) “Iogann Peter Shpet (Moshe Germanus): ot hristianskogo pietizma k evrejskoj k evrejskoj kabbale” [“Johann Peter Spet (Moshe Germanus): From Christian Pietism to Jewish Kabbalah”]. Judaica Rossica, 2003, vol. 3, pp. 51–79 (in Russian).
9. Burmistrov K. Yu. (2017) “Spinoza i kabbala: Konfl ikty, vliyaniya, istochniki” [“Spinoza and Kabbalah: Confl icts, Infl uences, Sources”], in Kontakty i konfl ikty v slavyanskoj i evrejskoj kul’turnoj tradicii, Moscow, pp. 10-33 (in Russian).
10. Burmistrov K. Yu., Ehndel’ M. I. (2002) ““Sefer jecira” v evrejskoj i hristianskoj tradiciyah” [““Sefer jecira” in Jewish and Christian Traditions”]. Judaica Rossica, vol. 2, pp. 49–80 (in Russian).
11. Burmistrov K., Endel M. (1999) “Kabbalah in Russian Masonry: Some Preliminary Observations”. Kabbalah: Journal for the Study of Jewish Mystical Texts, 1999, vol. 4, pp. 9–59.
12. Coudert A. P. (1999) The Impact of the Kabbalah in the Seventeenth Century: The Life and Thought of Francis Mercury Van Helmont (1614–1698). Leiden.
13. Ehndel’ M. I. (2001) “Original’nye kabbalisticheskie koncepcii v masonskom kodekse “O sfirot” (kon. XVIII v.)” [“Original Kabbalistic Concepts in Masonic Codex “O sfirot” (Late 18th Century)”]. Tirosh. Trudy po iudaike, 2001, vol. 5, pp. 37–50 (in Russian).
14. Ehndel’ M. I. (2017) “Stanislav Pinas Ehli — vrach, mason, kabbalist” [“Stanislav Pinas Ehli — Doctor, Mason, Kabbalist”], in Kontakty i konfl ikty v slavyanskoj i evrejskoj kul’turnoj tradicii […]. Moscow, pp. 33–50 (in Russian).
15. Ehndel’ M. (2000) “Ob odnom kabbalisticheskom kodekse v russkoj masonskoj literature” [“On One Kabbalistic Codex in Russian Masonic Literature”]. Tirosh: Trudy po iudaike [Tirosh. Jewish Studies], 2000, vol. 4, pp. 57–66 (in Russian).
16. Hudshina I. (2018) Shwarts. Available at: https://iphlib.ru/greenstone3/library/ library/collection/newphilenc/document/HASH0108924e2d320d69 ff 553108 (16.02.2018)
17. Kaufman I. (2005) “Filosofiya Spinozy v Rossii. Pervaya Chast’. 1774–1884” [“Spinoza’s Philosophy in Russia. Part 1. 1774–1884”], in Istoriko-filosofskij ezhegodnik, Moscow, 2005, pp. 312–344 (in Russian).
18. Kaufman I. (1989) “S. Spinoza v kontekste evrejskoj mysli” [“Spinoza in Context of Jewish Thought”]. Judaica Petropolitana, 2015, vol. 3, pp. 99–116 (in Russian).
19. Lejbnic G. V. (1989) Sochineniya: V 4 t. [Works in 4 Volumes]. Moscow, vol. 4 (in Russian).
20. Liebes Y. (1995) On Sabbateanism and Its Kabbalah: Collected Essays. Jerusalem.
21. Maciejko P. (2006) “Christian Elements in Early Frankist Doctrine”. GAL-ED. On the History and Culture of Polish Jewry, 2006, vol. 20, pp. 21–29.
22. Moshe ben Majmon. (2000) Putevoditel’ rasteryannyh [Itinerary of the Confused]. Moscow (in Russian).
23. Nassar D. (2014) The Romantic Absolute: Being and Knowing in Early German Romantic Philosophy 1795–1804. Chicago.
24. Nechipurenko V. N. (2007) Evrejskaya filosofiya i kabbala [Jewish Philosophy and Kabbalah]. Rostov-na-Donu (in Russian).
25. Schmidt-Biggemann W. (2013) Geschichte der christlichen Kabbala. Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt, vol. 3.
26. Scholem G. (1984) “Die Wachtersche Kontroverse über den Spinozismus und ihre Folgen”. Spinoza in der Frühzeit seiner religiösen Wirkung, Wolfenbütteler Studienzur Aufklärung, 1984, vol. 12, pp. 15–25.
27. Serkov A. (2001) Russkoe masonstvo. 1731–2000. Ehnciklopedicheskij slovar’ [Russian Freemasonry. 1731‒2000. Encyclopaedic Dictionary]. Moscow (in Russian).
28. Smirnov M. (2013) Religiya i religiovedenie v Rossii [Religion and Religious Studies in Russia]. Saint-Petersburg (in Russian).
29. Wolfson E. (1994) “The Tree That Is All: Jewish-Christian Roots of a Kabbalistic Symbol in Sefer ha-Bahir”. Journal of Jewish Thought and Philosophy, 1994, vol. 3/1, pp. 31–76.

Endel Maria

Materials for the article are collected thanks to the program of the Center "Sefer" (The project is supported by the Genesis Philanthropy Group). The author is grateful to the staff member of the National Library of Russia Pavel Andreevich Medvedev for their help in the work.

This article gives an overview of the development of psychology of religion in post-Soviet Russia from the 2000s to the present. The author evaluates this period as a stage of reviving of research in the fi eld in question. This trend is supposed to be associated with the infl uence of the personal factor and the objectively existing white spot in this fi eld rather than with a social request or the improvement in the fi nancialsituation of Russian science compared with the 1990s. There is positive dynamics in the nuber of defended academic theses in the fi eld of psychology of religion. The number of publications has also been increasing. The article outlines key thematic areas of research on psychology of religion, discusses the problem of developing methodological instruments, analyses the educational literature published in 2000‒2010 as well as signifi cant scientifi c events. The author of the article states that psychology of religion in Russia is currently going through the phase when the scientifi c community of psychologists and researchers of religion begins to identify itself and to consolidate its research eff orts. However, despite the clear though moderate growth, psychology of religion still remains in the shadow of institutionalised Christian psychology on the one hand and a range of other religious disciplines on the other hand.

psychology of religion, Christian psychology, history of psychology, religious studies, post-Soviet Russia, research areas, scientifi c community

1. Akademicheskoe issledovanie i kontseptualizatsiia religii v 21 veke: traditsii i novye vyzovy. Sbornik materialov Tret’ego kongressa rossiiskikh issledovatelei religii [Academic Study and Conceptualisation of Religion in 21st century: Traditions and New Challenges. Collection of Papers from 3rd Congress of Russian Researchers of Religion]. Vladimir, 2016, vol. 1 (in Russian).
2. Alper M. (1998) The «God» Part of the Brain: A Scientifi c Interpretation of Human Spirituality and God (Russian Translation).
3. Allport G. V. (1998) The Person in Psychology (Russian Translation).
4. Antonov K. M., Malevich T. V., Folieva T.A. (eds.) (2015) Psihologija religii: mezhdu teoriej i jempiriej [Psychology of Religion: Between Theory and Empirical Knowledge]. Moscow (in Russian).
5. Antonov K. M., Gorevoj D. S. et al. (eds.) (2017) Otechestvennaja i zarubezhnaja psihologija: paralleli i peresechenij a v proshlom i nastojashhem [Russian and Foreign Psychology: Parallels and Overlappings in the Past and in the Present]. Moscow (in Russian).
6. Ardashkin I. B. (2009) Psikhologiia religii: uchebnoe posobie [Psychology of Religion: Textbook]. Tomsk (in Russian).
7. Arinin E. I., Nefedova I. D. (2005) Psikhologiia religii: uchebnoe posobie dlia studentov spetsial’nosti “Religiovedenie” [Psychology of Religion: Textbook for Students of Religious Studies]. Vladimir (in Russian).
8. Astakhova L. S., Politova S. P. Psikhologiia religii (Chast’ 1: Vozniknovenie i stanovlenie): konspekt lektsii, available at: http://dspace.kpfu.ru/xmlui/bitstream/handle/net/21837/16_106_kl-000752.pdf (24.04.2018).
9. Azerbaidzhani M., Musavi-Asl S. M. (2012) Vvedenie v psikhologiiu religii [Introduction to Psychology of Religion]. Moscow (in Russian).
10. Belik A. A. (2011) Kul’tura i lichnost’: Psikhologicheskaia antropologiia. Etnopsikhologiia. Psikhologiia religii [Culture and Personality: Psychological Anthropology. Ethnopsychology. Psychology of Religion]. Moscow (in Russian).
11. Borisova O. A., Kopeiko G. I., Malevich T. V. (2015) “Neirobiologicheskii podkhod k izucheniiu religiozno-misticheskikh perezhivanii” [“Neurobiological Approach to the Study of Religious nad Mystic Experiences”]. Psikhiatriia, 2015, vol. 65, pp. 39–43 (in Russian).
12. Boyer P. (2017) Obiasniaia religiiu: priroda religioznogo myshleniia [Explaining Religion: Nature of Religious Thought]. Moscow (Russian Translation).
13. Chumakov M. V. (2008) “Interv’ju kak metod diagnostiki religioznosti lichnosti” [“Interview as Method of Diagnosing Religiosity of Person”], in Baturin N. A. (ed.) Sovremennaja psihodiagnostika v izmenjajushhejsja Rossii [Contemporary Psychodiagnostics in Changing Russia]. Chelyabinsk, pp. 105–106 (in Russian).
14. Chumakov M. V. (2001) Istorija psihologii religii: Teksty [History of Psychology of Religion: Texts]. Kurgan (in Russian).
15. Chumakova D. M. (2015) Psihologija religioznosti lichnosti [Psychology of Personal Religiosity]. Kurgan (in Russian).
16. Dvoinin A. M. (2011) Psihologija verujushhego: cennostno-smyslovye orientacii i religioznaja vera lichnosti [Believer’s Psychology: Values and Religious Faith of Personality]. St Petersburg (in Russian).
17. Folieva T. A., Malevich T. V. (2016) “Psihologija religii v 20 veke: osnovnye vehi razvitija” [“Psychology of Religion in 20th Century: Main Milestones”]. Gosudarstvo, religija, Cerkov’ v Rossii i za rubezhom, vol. 34, pp. 68–91 (in Russian).
18. Folieva T. A. (2015) “Adaptatsij a metodiki “Religious Emphasis Scale” / Shkala Religioznogo Akcentirovanija” [“Adapting the Technique “Religious Emphasis Scale”]. Vestnik Kostromskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriia: Pedagogika. Psihologiia. Social’naia rabota. Juvenologiia. Sociokinetika, 2015, vol. 4, pp. 101–104 (in Russian).
19. Granovskaia R. M. (2004; 2nd revised edition 2010) Psikhologiia very [Psychology of Faith]. St. Petersburg (in Russian).
20. Grosheva L. N., Tobalov Iu. P. (2004) Trudnye zhiznennye situatsii i sotsial’nye strakhi u veruiushchikh i ateistov [Difficult Situations in Life and Social Fears of Believers and Atheists]. Moscow (in Russian).
21. Gruzdev N. V., Spivak D. L. (2004) “Religiozno-psikhologicheskie orientatsii sovremennykh rossiian i amerikantsev: novye dannye” [“Religious and Psychological Orientations of Contemporary Russians and Americans: New Data”]. Tochki / Puncta, 2004, vol. 4, pp. 274–284 (in Russian).
22. Gurevich P. S. (2016) Religiovedenie [Religious Studies]. Moscow (in Russian).
23. Hood R. W. Jr., Hill P. C., Spilka B. (2009) The Psychology of Religion: An Empirical Approach. New York.
24. Kostylev P. N. Psihologija religii v rossijskoj sisteme vysshego professional’nogo obrazovanija, available at: http://hentiamenti.livejournal.com/409331.html (24.04.2018).
25. Krys’ko V. G. (2016) Social’naja psihologija [Social Psychology]. Moscow (in Russian).
26. Malevich T. V., Kolkunova K. A., Kozhevnikov D. D. (2017) “Pravoslavnye reprezentacii Boga i impli citnoe antropomorfnoe myshlenie” [“Orthodox Representations of God and Implicit Antropomorphic Thinking”]. Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia I: Bogoslovie. Filosofiia. Religiovedenie, 2017, vol. 74, pp. 67–90 (in Russian).
27. Malevich T. V., Kolkunova K. A., Kozhevnikov D. D. (2016) “Bog kak kauzal’nyj agent”: religioznaia atributsij a v pravoslavnom kontekste. Kul’turno-istoricheskaja psihologija” [“God as Causal Agent: Religious Attribution in Orthodox Context”]. Kul’turno-istoricheskaia psikhologiia, 2016, vol. 13, pp. 60–70 (in Russian).
28. Malevich T. V., Kozhevnikov D. D. (2016) “Diskussii o “vrozhdennoj” religioznosti v kognitivnom religiovedenii” [“Discussions about “Innate” Religiosity in Cognitive Religious Studies”]. Gosudarstvo, religija, Cerkov’ v Rossii i za rubezhom, 2016, vol. 34, pp. 373–398 (in Russian).
29. Malevich T. V. (2016) “Evoljucionnoe znachenie religii: mezhdu adaptatsiej i pobochnym produktom” [“Meaning of Religion in Evolution: Between Adaptation and Side Product”]. Vestnik PSTGU. Seriia I: Bogoslovie. Filosofi ia. Religiovedenie, 2016, vol. 66, pp. 84–104 (in Russian).
30. Malevich T. V. (2015) “Empiricheskie metody issledovanij a religioznogo opyta v psihologii religii: istorija i sovremennye tendencii (vtoraja polovina 20 — nachalo 21 v.)” [“Empirical Methods in the Study of Religious Exprience in Psychology of Religion: History and Contemporary Trends (Second Half of 20th — Early 21st Centuries”]. Vestnik Volgogradskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Serij a 7: Filosofija, 2015, vol. 27, pp. 83–95 (in Russian).
31. Malevich T. V. (2012) “Nejroteologij a: teorii religii i nauka o mozge” [“Neurotechnology: Theories of Religion and Science of Brain”]. Religiovedcheskie issledovanija, 2012, vol. 7–8, pp. 62–83 (in Russian).
32. Malevich T. V., Antonov K. M., Kolkunova K. A. (eds.) ( 2017) Sovremennaja zapadnaja psihologija religii: Hrestomatija [Contemporary Western Psychology of Religion: Anthology]. Moscow (in Russian).
33. Medvedeva E. N. Adaptacija metodiki “Shkala religioznogo reshenija problem”, available at: https://medconfer.com/node/8520 (24.04.2018).
34. Medvedeva E. N. (2014) “Problema metodologii issledovanij a v otechestvennoj psihologii religii” [“Problem of Methodology of Study in Russian Psychology of Religion”]. Izvestija Saratovskogo universiteta. Novaja serija. Serija: Filosofija. Psihologija. Pedagogika, 2014, vol. 14, pp. 78–83 (in Russian).
35. Mikhelson O. K. (2013) “Podhody k izuchenij u religii v sovremennoi evoljucionnoj psikhologii” [“Approaches to the Study of Religion in Contemporary Evolutionary Psychology”]. Gosudarstvo, religija, Cerkov’ v Rossii i za rubezhom, 2013, vol. 31, pp. 63–76 (in Russian).
36. Myagkov I. F., Shcherbatykh Yu. V., Kravtsova M. S. (1996) “Psihologicheskij analiz urovnja individual’noj religioznosti” [“Psychological Analysis of the Level of Individual Religiosity”]. Psihologicheskii zhurnal, 1996, vol. 17, pp. 119–122 (in Russian).
37. Newberg A., d’Aquili E., Rause V. (2013) Tajna Boga i nauka o mozge. Nejrobiologij a very i religioznogo opyta [Mystery of God and Science of Brain. Neurobiology of Faith and Religious Experience]. Moscow (in Russian).
38. Newberg A., Waldman M. R. (2012) How God Changes Your Brain (Russian Translation).
39. Olshanskiy D. V. (2002) Psihologija mass [Psychology of Masses]. St Petersburg (in Russian).
40. Paloutzian R. F., Park C. L. (eds.) (2005) Handbook of the Psychology of Religion and Spirituality. New York.
41. Pavlova O. S. (2015) “Psihologij a religii v islamskoj paradigme: sostojanie i perspektivy razvitija” [“Psychology of Religion an Islamic Paradigm: Current State and Prospects of Development”]. Islam v sovremennom mire, 2015, vol. 11, pp. 207–222 (in Russian).
42. Plotnikova L. I. (2009) Psihologija religii [Psychology of Religion]. Chita (in Russian).
43. Selchenok K. V. (ed.) (2001) Psihologija religioznosti i misticizma: hrestomatija [Psychology of Religiosity and Mysticism: Anthology]. Minsk, Moscow (in Russian).
44. Safronov A. G. (2002) Psihologija religii [Psychology of Religion]. Kiev (in Russian).
45. Shakhnovich M. M. (2013) “Kognitivnaja nauka i issledovanija religii” [“Cognitive Science and Studies of Religion”]. Gosudarstvo, religija, Cerkov’ v Rossii i za rubezhom, 2013, vol. 31, pp. 32–62 (in Russian).
46. Smirnova (Dubova) E. T. (2003) Vvedenie v religioznuju psihologij u [Introduction to Religious Psychology]. Samara (in Russian).
47. Spilka B., Ljedd K. L. (2015) Psihologija molitvy: nauchnyj podhod [Psychology of Religion: Scientifi c Approach]. Kharkiv (in Russian).
48. Vasiliuk F. E. (2017) “Predposylki periodizatsii noveishei istorii khristianskoi psikhologii” [“Prerequisites of Periodisation of Contemporary History of Christain Psychology”], in Bratus’ B. (ed.) Khristianskaia psikhologiia v kontekste nauchnogo mirovozzreniia [Christian Psychology in Context of Scientifi c Worldview], Moscow, pp. 50–69 (in Russian).
49. Vasiliuk F. E. (2005) Molitva i perezhivanie (opyt obshchepsikhologicheskogo issledovaniia) [Prayer and Experience (Attempt at General Psychological Study]. Moscow (in Russian).
50. Vikhorev S. A. (2010) Istoriia, teoriia i psikhologiia religii [History, Theory and Psychology of Religion]. Novosibirsk (in Russian).
51. Wulff D. M. (1997) Psychology of Religion: Classic & Contemporary. New York.

Dvoinin Alexey

*According to the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) 2011, the degree of Candidate of Sciences (Cand.Sc.) belongs to ISCED level 8 — "doctoral or equivalent", together with PhD, DPhil, D.Lit, D.Sc, LL.D, Doctorate or similar.

The publication was prepared within the framework of the scientific project No. 16-03-00799 "The Psychology of Religion in Russia: XIX - early XXIst century", supported by the grant of the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (RFH).

Veviurko Il'ia

*According to the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) 2011, the degree of Candidate of Sciences (Cand.Sc.) belongs to ISCED level 8 — "doctoral or equivalent", together with PhD, DPhil, D.Lit, D.Sc, LL.D, Doctorate or similar.

Kolkunova Ksenia

*According to the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) 2011, the degree of Candidate of Sciences (Cand.Sc.) belongs to ISCED level 8 — "doctoral or equivalent", together with PhD, DPhil, D.Lit, D.Sc, LL.D, Doctorate or similar.