{"title":"The Seductions of Gnosticism: Lev Karsavin and Gnosis","authors":"A. Kozyrev","doi":"10.1080/10611967.2022.2155012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article looks at Lev P. Karsavin’s experience with the heritage of early Christian Gnosticism, from his attempts at stylization based on his study of genuine Gnostic texts and his systematic presentation of Gnostic systems in art almanacs published in the Soviet Union, to his perception of Gnosticism as a kind of “other principle” in his original religious–philosophical texts. We show that, following Silver-Age traditions, Karsavin uses myth as a form of philosophical thinking. He teeters on the edge of Gnosticism, applying certain Gnostic concepts, but he generally turns to Gnostic thought only to distinguish it from his own, which he presents as authentic to the Christian tradition. He criticizes both ontological and anthropological postulates of Gnosticism: the hierarchization of intradivine life, the introduction of the cosmic feminine into the bosom of the Divine, the interpretation of the Fall as the kenosis of God in time, and the explanation of the perfect God from the imperfect world, as well as the type of religious personhood that leads to a rupture in theory and personal faith. We examine Karsavin’s reception of Gnosticism against the background of interest in Gnosticism in post-revolutionary Russia, as expressed by Kropotkinite anarchists, A. Karelin, V. Murav’ev, Yu. Danzas, and M. Kuzmin.","PeriodicalId":42094,"journal":{"name":"RUSSIAN STUDIES IN PHILOSOPHY","volume":"60 1","pages":"473 - 488"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"RUSSIAN STUDIES IN PHILOSOPHY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10611967.2022.2155012","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
ABSTRACT This article looks at Lev P. Karsavin’s experience with the heritage of early Christian Gnosticism, from his attempts at stylization based on his study of genuine Gnostic texts and his systematic presentation of Gnostic systems in art almanacs published in the Soviet Union, to his perception of Gnosticism as a kind of “other principle” in his original religious–philosophical texts. We show that, following Silver-Age traditions, Karsavin uses myth as a form of philosophical thinking. He teeters on the edge of Gnosticism, applying certain Gnostic concepts, but he generally turns to Gnostic thought only to distinguish it from his own, which he presents as authentic to the Christian tradition. He criticizes both ontological and anthropological postulates of Gnosticism: the hierarchization of intradivine life, the introduction of the cosmic feminine into the bosom of the Divine, the interpretation of the Fall as the kenosis of God in time, and the explanation of the perfect God from the imperfect world, as well as the type of religious personhood that leads to a rupture in theory and personal faith. We examine Karsavin’s reception of Gnosticism against the background of interest in Gnosticism in post-revolutionary Russia, as expressed by Kropotkinite anarchists, A. Karelin, V. Murav’ev, Yu. Danzas, and M. Kuzmin.
本文考察了列夫·p·卡尔萨文(Lev P. Karsavin)对早期基督教诺斯替主义遗产的经验,从他基于对真正的诺斯替文本的研究而进行的程式化尝试,以及他在苏联出版的艺术年鉴中对诺斯替体系的系统呈现,到他在其原始的宗教哲学文本中将诺斯替主义视为一种“其他原则”。我们表明,遵循银器时代的传统,卡尔萨文使用神话作为哲学思维的一种形式。他在诺斯替主义的边缘摇摇欲坠,运用了某些诺斯替主义的概念,但他通常转向诺斯替主义思想,只是为了将其与他自己的思想区分开来,他把自己的思想呈现为真实的基督教传统。他批判了诺斯替主义的本体论和人类学假设:神内生命的等级化,将宇宙女性引入神的怀里,将堕落解释为上帝在时间上的克诺西,从不完美的世界中解释完美的上帝,以及导致理论和个人信仰破裂的宗教人格类型。我们考察了卡尔萨文对诺斯替主义的接受,其背景是对革命后俄罗斯诺斯替主义的兴趣,如克鲁波特金无政府主义者,A.卡列林,V.穆拉夫耶夫,余。丹萨斯和库兹明先生。
期刊介绍:
Russian Studies in Philosophy publishes thematic issues featuring selected scholarly papers from conferences and joint research projects as well as from the leading Russian-language journals in philosophy. Thematic coverage ranges over significant theoretical topics as well as topics in the history of philosophy, both European and Russian, including issues focused on institutions, schools, and figures such as Bakhtin, Fedorov, Leontev, Losev, Rozanov, Solovev, and Zinovev.