Sophia-Image vs. Sophia-Hypostasis: The Features of Reception of the Wisdom of God Concept by Athanasius of Alexandria in the Sophiology of Pavel Florensky | Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta – Tomsk State University Journal. 2019. № 441. DOI: 10.17223/15617793/441/13

Sophia-Image vs. Sophia-Hypostasis: The Features of Reception of the Wisdom of God Concept by Athanasius of Alexandria in the Sophiology of Pavel Florensky

The article considers the problem of Athanasius' concept of Wisdom reception by Pavel Florensky. Athanasius formulated this concept in connection with the reinterpretation of Proverbs 8:22-30: "The Lord possessed me at the beginning of His way, before His works of old. I have been established from everlasting, from the beginning, before there was ever an earth. <. . .> When He prepared the heavens, I was there <. . .>. When He marked out the foundations of the earth, then I was beside Him as a master craftsman; and I was daily His delight, Rejoicing always before Him". Athanasius reinterpreted Wisdom, which speaks in this fragment, as Logos, Son of God, by whom God the Father created the whole world. Florensky (as well as some other authors of Vladimir Solo-vyov's circle) has a different understanding of Sophia, although he continues to refer to Athanasius' texts. That is why most researchers have concluded that Florensky depended on Solovyov's sophiology. This problem is solved on the material of the texts, which Athanasius and Florensky devoted to this issue (i.e. The Word Against Arians by Athanasius and the chapter "Sophia" from Florensky's book The Pillar and Affirmation of the Truth). These texts are investigated using comparative, historical, hermeneutic, typological and phenomenological methods. First of all, the author studies the concept of Sophia by Athanasius of Alexandria, then reconstructs the concept of Sophia by Pavel Florensky. In particular, the author not only reconstructs the content, but also establishes the way Florensky works with the text of Athanasius. Finally, the author compares Athanasius' and Florensky's approaches to the issue of Sophia and discovers that the latter ignores the concept of the image in Athanasius' theory. Florensky does not interpret Sophia as Logos, whose image the Wisdom of Proverbs 8:22 in Athanasius is, but as Virgin and virginity (which brings him much closer to Jakob Boehme than to Athanasius). Separating Wisdom from Logos, Florensky endows Her with hypostaticity, which leads him to a separation from the early Byzantine Orthodox tradition of the Wisdom concept interpretation. Thus, Florensky does not perceive the content of Athanasius' thoughts, but only uses his formulas, citing The Second Word against the Arians for his own purposes, namely, to construct his concrete metaphysics. However, with this usage, Athanasius' idea of the image ceased being necessary in Florensky's sophiology and is substituted by the idea of a created hypostasis. Thus, the influence of Solovyov on Florensky was not as significant as some researchers believed. German mystics, especially Boehme's concept, had a much greater influence on him. Also the Byzantine influence appears underestimated, which however was expressed in the appeal to theological formulas rather than in the reception of theological ideas.

Download file
Counter downloads: 159

Keywords

София, ранневизантийское богословие, Афанасий Александрийский, Павел Флоренский, русская религиозная философия, византийская теория образа, Sophia the Wisdom of God, early Byzantine theology, Athanasius of Alexandria, Pavel Florensky, Russian religious philosophy, Byzantine theory of image

Authors

NameOrganizationE-mail
Miroshnichenko Evgeniy I.Institute of Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciencesmiroshnichenkoeu@gmail.com
Всего: 1

References

David Zd. The influence of Jacob Boehme on Russian Religious Thought // Slavic Review. 1962. Vol. 21, t. 1. P. 43-64.
Nemeth Th. The Early Solov'ev and His Quest for Metaphysics. Springer, 2014.
Мирошниченко Е.И. Путь постижения Истины: онтологическая гносеология П.А. Флоренского // Мирошниченко Е.И. История раннего платонизма в России. Статьи по истории русской философии. СПб., 2013. С. 145-170.
Бонецкая Н.К. Русская софиология и антропософия // Вопросы философии. 1995. № 7. С. 79-97.
Павлюченков Н.Н. Идея Софии в трудах священника Павла Флоренского // Вестник ПСТГУ: Богословие. Философия. 2015. Вып. 4 (60). С. 24-38.
Френч М. Лик Премудрости. Дилемма философии и перспектива софиологии. СПб., 2015.
Козырев А.П. Соловьёв и гностики. М., 2007.
De Courten M. History, Sophia and the Russian Nation. A Reassessment of Vladimir Solov'ev's Views on History and his Social Commitment. Bern : Peter Lang AG, 2004.
Бердяев Н. Из этюдов о Якове Бёме. Этюд II. Учение о Софии и андрогине. Я. Бёме и русские софиологические течения // Путь. 1930. № 21. С. 34-62.
Evtuhov C. Sergei Bulgakov: A Study in Modernism and Society in Russia, 1900-1918: dissertation for the degree of Doctor of philosophy in History. Berkeley : University of California, 1991.
Флоренский П.А. Столп и утверждение Истины. М., 1990. Т. I (1).
Бахарева Н.Н. Софийные мотивы в восточно-христианской художественной культуре IV - начала XV веков: диссертация на соискание ученой степени кандидата философских наук. Н. Новгород, 2007.
Athanasius. Werke. Bd. I. Die Dogmatischen Schriften. Contra arianos oratio secunda. Berlin ; New York : De Gruyter, 1998.
Kannengiesser Ch. The Athanasian Understanding of Scripture // Interpretation. 1981. Vol. 35. P. 221-229.
Jones M.D. Hermeneutical Principles in Contra Arianos of Athanasius of Alexandria: dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Theology. University of South Africa, 2004.
Бирюков Д.С. Вера - язык: Юлиан и свт. Григорий Назианзин // Император Юлиан. Сочинения. СПб., 2007. С. 55-88.
Мирошниченко Е.И. Византийская концепция образа: между неоплатонизмом и богословием каппадокийских отцов // Идеи и идеалы. 2010. № 3, т. 2. С. 22-32.
Schonborn Ch. God's Human Face: The Christ-Icon. San-Francisco : Ignatius Press, 1994.
Булгаков С., прот. Купина Неопалимая. Париж, 1927.
Серафим (Соболев), архиеп. Новое учение о Софии Премудрости Божией. София, 1935.
Творения иже во святых отца нашего Афанасия Великого, архиепископа Александрийского. Свято-Троицкая Сергиева Лавра, 1902. Т. 2. С. 260-368.
Братство святой Софии. Материалы и документы. 1923-1939. Протоколы семинаров о Софии, Премудрости Божией. Москва ; Париж, 2000. С. 130-131.
Ваганова Н.А. Софиология протоиерея Сергия Булгакова. М., 2011. С. 104-107.
Флоренский П.А. Сочинения : в 4 т. М., 2000. Т. 3 (2).
Лейбниц Г.В. Монадология // Лейбниц Г.В. Сочинения : в 4 т. М., 1982. Т. 1.
Фокин И.Л. Philosophus Teutonicus. Якоб Бёме: возвещение и путь немецкого идеализма. СПб., 2014.
Фокин И.Л. Учение Бёме о происхождении и назначении человека // Вестник Ленинградского государственного университета им. А.С. Пушкина. 2010. № 1. С. 65-74.
 Sophia-Image vs. Sophia-Hypostasis: The Features of Reception of the Wisdom of God Concept by Athanasius of Alexandria in the Sophiology of Pavel Florensky | Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta – Tomsk State University Journal. 2019. № 441. DOI: 10.17223/15617793/441/13

Sophia-Image vs. Sophia-Hypostasis: The Features of Reception of the Wisdom of God Concept by Athanasius of Alexandria in the Sophiology of Pavel Florensky | Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta – Tomsk State University Journal. 2019. № 441. DOI: 10.17223/15617793/441/13

Download full-text version
Counter downloads: 2007