Tolstoy and Dostoevsky: Two Images of Finding God

The religious opposition of Tolstoy and Dostoevsky was formalized (or even created) and was significantly widened in the works of Russian religious philosophy. The almost unconditional acceptance (or at least sympathy) for Dostoevsky's religiosity, along with distrust and well-known criticism of Tolstoy's later religious works, was firmly entrenched in the Orthodox and general cultural consciousness for more than a century. However, the confrontation was never taken seriously. We want to outline the insurmountable chasm between two images of finding God using the example of the relationship between Raskolnikov and Sonya Marmeladova on the one hand, and Father Sergius (Stepan Kasatsky) and Pashenka (Praskovya Mikhailovna) on the other. These examples are of a paradigmatic nature and can be extended to other artistic and religious (in Dostoevsky's case, journalistic) works of Dostoevsky and Tolstoy. From the legacy of Russian religious philosophy for the consideration of the works selected in the article ("Crime and Punishment" and "Father Sergius"), Bulgakov's "The Man-God and the Man-Beast" has the greatest and characteristic value. The opposition set by Bulgakov between Tolstoy (using the example of later works) and Dostoevsky (using the figure of the elder Zosima) is considered a misunderstanding by us. Bulgakov biasedly understands the religious meaning of Tolstoy's later texts. We offer a different reading of "Father Sergius" and raise the question of different images of the attainment (finding) of God in the texts of Tolstoy and Dostoevsky anew.

Study of Religious Philosophy on Tapa Brata (Javanese Asceticism Practice) to Overcome the Social Anxiety During COVID-19 Pandemic Era

<p><span lang="EN-US">The COVID-19 pandemic, which is global disaster, has an impact on all aspects of human life. Indonesia is one of the countries that has</span><span lang="EN-US"> </span><span lang="EN-US">a high rate of COVID-19</span><span lang="EN-US"> </span><span lang="EN-US">transmission,</span><span lang="EN-US"> </span><span lang="EN-US">this has an effect on various</span><span lang="EN-US"> </span><span lang="EN-US">policies</span><span lang="EN-US"> </span><span lang="EN-US">in suppressing transmission rates by limiting social mobility.</span><span lang="EN-US"> </span><span lang="EN-US">In the midst of this pandemic, people are faced with uncertain conditions that result in levels boredom, fear and even public anxiety increased.</span><span lang="EN-US"> </span><span lang="EN-US">The author is interested in exploring the realities of the COVID-19 pandemic by seeing that there is a relationship between public anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic and awareness of the need for spirituality in facing the various changes that have occurred.</span><span lang="EN-US"> </span><span lang="EN-US">Using the philosophical hermeneutic method, this qualitative research was conducted by trying to discuss one of the spiritual practices of Javanese society, namely Tapa Brata, and to relate it to public anxiety that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic.</span><span lang="EN-US"> </span><span lang="EN-US">The results of the discussion</span><span lang="EN-US"> </span><span lang="EN-US">carried out are: (1)</span><span lang="EN-US"> </span><span lang="EN-US">anxiety in the people during the pandemic period is caused by awareness of an uncertain and constantly changing reality.</span><span lang="EN-US"> </span><span lang="EN-US">(2)</span><span lang="EN-US"> </span><span lang="EN-US">Tapa brata is the mental practice of forming a self that is calm and wise in accepting all changes.</span><span lang="EN-US"> </span><span lang="EN-US">(3)</span><span lang="EN-US"> </span><span lang="EN-US">Tapa brata is an inner practice that is personal and</span><span lang="EN-US"> </span><span lang="EN-US">can overcome public anxiety during a pandemic and has a physiological effect in increasing immunity during the Covid-19 pandemic.</span></p>

Genesis of Russian religious philosophy of the Slavophiles A. S. Khomyakov and I. V. Kireevsky

The article is devoted to the philosophical, religious and world views of A. S. Khomyakov and I. V. Kireevsky. Based on the analysis of the authors’ creative and epistolary heritage, the authors show the ambiguity of their judgment from the point of view of Orthodox theology. The hermeneutic method allowed the author to analyze the primary sources of A. S. Khomyakov and I. V. Kireevsky, their contemporaries and followers from the point of view of Orthodox theology to determine the degree of their compliance with Orthodox doctrine. The purpose of the work is to compare the creative heritage of the founders of the religious and philosophical movement of the Slavophiles A. S. Khomyakov and I. V. Kireevsky. This is a new look at the formation of the religious and philosophical worldviews of A. S. Khomyakov and I. V. Kireevsky. The strongest sides of A. S. Khomyakov are the following: he presents the Church as a single moral union of those who preach the teachings of Christ, based on love for their neighbor. Rationalism is not conducive to the establishment of faith, and everyone who is separated from the Church does not have love. I. V. Kireevsky, on the other hand, followed the path of knowledge of Roman philosophy and its influence on the formation of Western theology; analysis and conclusions in assessing the development of theology in Russia and Europe; negative effect of ritualism on the worldview of true Orthodoxy in Russia.

THE ROLE HAGIOGRAPHY IN THE OF G.P. FEDOTOV'S RELIGIOUS PHILOSOPHY

Агиография занимает важное место в наследии Г.П. Федотова, обращение к этой проблематике связано с эволюцией его мировоззрения от марксизма к неохристианству. Под влиянием западной традиции Бл. Августина, П. Абеляра он обращается к святоотеческому наследию, рассматривая условия возникновения агиографических жанров, выявляет их особенности и критерии святости, описывает типы святости, сложившиеся на Руси. Hagiography occupies a significant place in Fedotov's legacy; the appeal to this problem is connected with the evolution of his worldview from Marxism to neo-Christianity. Under the influence of the Western tradition of St. Augustine, P. Abelard, he turns to the patristic heritage, considering the conditions for the emergence of the hagiographic genre, identifies its features and criteria of holiness, describes the types of holiness that have developed in Russia.

Reflections on the City of Alexandria and the growth of the early Christian faith

The city of Alexandria in Egypt was and remains the centre of the Orthodox Patriarchate of Alexandria, and it was one of the major centres of Christianity in the Eastern Roman Empire. St. Mark the Evangelist was the founder of the See, and the Patriarchate's emblem is the Lion of Saint Mark. It was in this city where the Christian faith was vigorously promoted, and in which Hellenic culture flourished. The first theological school of Christendom was stablished which drove catechesis and the study of religious philosophy to new heights. It was greatly supported in its quest by numerous champions of the faith and early Church Fathers such as inter-alia, Pantaenus, Clement, Dionysius, Gregory, Eusebius, Athanasius, Didymus and Origen. Both the Greek Orthodox Church of Alexandria and also the Coptic Church, lay claim to the ancient legacy of Alexandria. By the time of the Arab conquest of Egypt in 641 CE, the city had lost much of its significance. Today the Greek or Eastern Orthodox Patriarchate of Alexandria remains a very important organ the dissemination of Christianity in Africa especially due to its missionary activities. The head bishop of the Patriarchate of Alexandria and all Africa, Theodore II, and his clerics are performing meritorious works on the continent to the glory of God’s Kingdom. This article traces, albeit it in a limited sense, the history of the faith in Alexandria using a desk-top research methodology. In order to trace Alexandria’s historical development and especially its Christian religious focus, existing relevant primary and secondary data considered to be relevant was utilised including research material published in academic articles, books, bibliographic essays, Biblical and Church documents, electronic documents and websites.

Sergey Khoruzhy, or the motif of the problematic character of death

The article is devoted to the memory of an outstanding scholar — physicist, philosopher, theologian and translator — S. Khoruzhy (1941–2020), with whom the author maintained active communication for three decades. This communication included various human and scholarly encounters: meetings in person, correspondence, participation in projects and conferences, book presentations, and shared accommodations in Sofia and Moscow. The article reveals a number of hitherto unknown facts of the scholar’s biography. Also published are his thoughts on topics he found most relevant, based on an interview in Sofia in June 1997, transcribed by the author. Khoruzhy’s philosophical studies ran in parallel with his major subject (theoretical physics), but it was not until 1989 that his theological and philosophical works reached a wider audience. The article emphasises Khoruzhy’s versatile giſt: an original philosopher, author of the concept of synergetic anthropology and successor of the traditions of Russian religious philosophy, he is also atranslator of Ulysses, a scholar of J. Joyce, and a prominent figure of 20th- and 21st-c. Russian culture.

One or None? Truth and Self-Transformation for Śaṅkara and Kamalaśīla

This article explores how two influential 8th-century Indian philosophers, Śaṅkara and Kamalaśīla, treat the threefold scheme of learning, reasoning, and meditation in their spiritual path philosophies. They have differing institutional and ontological commitments: the former, who helped establish Advaita Vedānta as the religious philosophy of an elite Hindu monastic tradition, affirms an unchanging “self” (ātman) identical to the “world-essence” (brahman); the latter, who played a significant role in the development of Buddhist monasticism in Tibet, denies both self and essence. Yet, they share a concern with questions of truth and the means by which someone could gain access to it, such as what, if anything, meditation contributes to knowledge and its acquisition. By exploring their answers to this and related questions, including how discursive and conceptual practices like learning, reasoning, and meditation could generate nonconceptual knowledge or knowledge of the nonconceptual, this essay shows the difficulty of separating “philosophical” problems of truth from those related to self-transformation or “spirituality,” as Michel Foucault defines the terms. It also reassesses, as a framework for comparison, the well-known contrast between “gradual” and “sudden” approaches to the achievement of liberating knowledge and highlights them as tensions we still struggle to resolve today.