THE QUESTION OF NEO-BOGOMILISM
Historical sources on Mediaeval Bogomilism and cognate movements have led to numerous and often completely opposite conclusions in contemporary history and history of religion. Due to limitations only some of the unresolved points are mentioned here: the relation between the currents of socalled radical and moderate dualism; the origin of the movement and its geographical ubication; the social position of the adherents; the relationship between different terms – Bogomils, Patarins, Kudugers, Babuns[85] (do they designate one and the same movement?); its relation towards Western dualist movements in Italy and Southern France and towards older movements – Paulicianism, Massalianism; its relation with Hesychasm. The answers cover a wide range of proposals, from perceiving it as part of an unbroken linkage of Gnosis as Weltreligion, to the deconstruction of the very notion of NeoManicheism as mere topos in heresiologist writings (The former position has been recently advocated by Stoyanov [Stoyanov 1994, 2000]; the latter can be seen, for example, in Rigo’s research on Bogomilism and Hesychasm [Rigo 1989]). The question where a consensus was also not reached is whether there was an esoteric side of the Bogomil doctrine (for example [Neli 1964: 66] in a rather moderate way; [Stoyanov 2000: 260–263; 293–294; 2002]; cf. [Lambert 1977: 15; Loos 1974: 89]) or was it a heterodox movement, secreted but without esoteric and initiatic elements [Runciman 1999:
177–178; Servier 1998].
But there is one additional aspect of these disputes. The interest of historians in this subject from 19th century onwards[86] developed contemporaneously with the liberation of the Balkan states from Ottoman rule; research of national past played great role both during this period and later. The differences in the interpretation of the sources were often due to the author’s position towards current situations or towards the idea of the national identity. For example, in Bulgaria Bogomilism was interpreted as a national movement against the foreign Byzantine Church; as quietist and negativistic movement which contributed to the weakness of the state and its fall under foreign dominion; in Communism, as popular movement against feudal system etc. Evidently, the beginning of the modernization in 19th century was perceived by Bulgarian intellectuals themselves as belated, and thus produced a need for some historical points that could serve as a source for establishing identity [Švat-Glbova 2010]. Bogomilism can be perceived as an important point of memory, inciting projections/interpretations of the past.
|
|
|
The situation was similar in the former Yugoslav states: Bogomils were seen as expression of essentially Slavic mysticism, or a national movement, or as peasant opposition to feudalism etc. The Macedonian nation, officially recognized in new communist state in 1945, also took Bogomils into account in its national identity [Racin 1966]. In the movie «The Secret Book» (2006), the theme of Bogomils and Cathars in Macedonia (independent since 1992) appeared as one of main subjects of the plot. It is not surprising that the linguist who was the most active in inventing «Montenegrin» language twenty years ago, also promoted «the gnostic heritage of Montenegro» [Nikčević 1999]. Even the small ethnic community of Torbeši (Macedonian Slavs converted to Islam) traces its origins to the Bogomils [Dokle 2011]. (Bogomils also inspired some literary works: Milorad Pavić’s «Dictionary of Khazars» (1984) gives description of «Khazar religion» – which is actually a variant of Bogomil moderated dualism. The historical novel by Bulgarian writer Anton Dončev «The Mysterious Knight of the Holy Book» (1998)is based on thehistoriographic concept of the Bogomil-Cathar connection).
But there was one debated, not to say sensitive, topic in Yugoslavian scholarship: the issue of the Bosnian Church.
Some of the opinions on its nature are the «dualist» theory (that it was Dualist Church, derived from Bogomilism), the «folk» theory (that it was a folk Church independent from Rome and Constantinople, but not heretical in nature), the «Orthodox» theory (that it was a folk Church, which separated from Orthodox Church organizationally but not dogmatically – or even if it was heterodox it was derived from Eastern monasticism) and the «Catholic» theory (that it was essentially a Catholic Church but separate from Rome)[87].
After the dissolution of Yugoslavia the debates moved beyond the academic milieu and, in a more fervid manner, continued in journals, internet forums and daily politics, thus reflecting interethnical tensions in the former Yugoslav states. While the political subtext of some of the theories could be deduced even earlier, it became more open and more widespread during this period. The idea of Bosnian Church being Orthodox was supported by some Serbian authors; its Catholic nature was advocated by some Croatian authors; while intelligentsia of Bosnian Muslims had long before embraced the theory of the Bogomil doctrine of the Church and Bogomil conversion to Islam en masse [88] .
|
|
|
Contemporary ethnology and sociology have started examining to a certain extent this interpretations and constructions of Bogomilism [Nedeljković 2007: 107–110]. However, even these examinations overlook the point that will be presented here: the esoteric readings of Bogomilism[89]. That is not surprising. While research of national struggles and identitarian politics carries weight in public opinion, esotericism is perceived as a fringe – or perhaps better said it is pushed to the fringe. I will use Bogomils as an umbrella term for all Balkan medieval movements labelled as dualist, in spite of their different names attested in sources; also, while comparing modern movements with «classical» Bogomils I will not address the problems of «real» doctrine, so meticulously researched by scholars. As the referential point I will use the image of Bogomilism as presented in historiography and thus available to modern groups.
Local branches of international esoteric societies have from the start of their activity perceived Bogomils as a link in the chain of transmission of esoteric knowledge. This is, of course, based on the epistemological strategy of esotericism [Stuckrad 2008: 230–232; Hammer 2004: 44]. However, at the same time, this link is of national character. Therefore, during the period between the two World wars Yugoslavian anthroposophists wrote about Bogomils in their magazin («Upoznaj sebe [Know Thyself]», 1931–1941) depicting them as ancestors, both spiritual and national. Contemporary local branches of Lectorium Rosicrucianum in Bulgaria[90], Serbia and Croatia mention in their official presentations and public lectures Bogomils in the same vein. Still, the teachings of local anthroposophists or Rosicrucians are firmly grounded in Rudolf Steiner (1861–1925) and Jan van Rijkenborg (1896–1968) and have nothing to do with Bogomilism – except incorporating it into their chains of transmission, as local links.
|
|
|
More can be found if we look at the esoteric movements originally stemming from the Balkans. The most famous is the Universal White Brotherhood founded by Petăr Dănov (1864–1944). Dănov openly claimed to be the successor of Bogomilism i.e. more precisely, that the White Brotherhood, described as ancient, is the source of all other esoteric teachings, including Bogomilism; the later subdivided into three branches, one of them becoming European Rosicrucianism. Bulgaria’s fall under Ottoman rule was allegedely punishment for the persecution of Bogomils. However in addition to these statements, are there real Bogomil teachings in the work of Dănov and his disciples (the most important being Omraam Mikhael Aivanhov (1900–1986))? I will not go into this discussion since the White Brotherhood has existed for a century, but rather I will focuss on groups that have appeared recently. One should mention only that Dănov’s teaching is basically an offshoot of Blavatskian theosophy (cycles, man’s multiple bodies) with more Christian character (Introvigne, in: [Hanegraaff 2006: 309–310][91]. There is also a tone of optimism and progressivism, which is at odds with dualism but conforms to modern esoteric movements. In Aivanhov it is possible to find paragraphs speaking of men’s regressive, involutive fall into the dense matter [Aivanhov 2008: 116, 2010: 81–82] depicted through the typical Gnostic image of prison [Ibid.: 167]. Although this supeficially resembles the Bogomil doctrine of the fall of preexistent souls into the prison of material bodies, Aivanhov doesn’t actually teach about a real fall. (Similar references to monads entering matter can also be found in Blavatsky). He speaks very clearly against the idea that matter and body are bad: human existence on earth is not an exile, it is God’s intention that man study the matter [Aivanhov 2003: 83]; the body is not the soul’s prison because God created both spirit and matter [Ibid.: 143] – there is no other creator, who would be responsible solely for matter [Aivanhov 2005: 13]. Therefore one should not reject nature [Ibid.: 112] or sex, for instance [Aivanhov 1985]. This is very far from dualism.
|
|
|
While incorporating Bogomils into esoteric discourse, Dănov at the same time presents them and his own teachings as the epiphany of Bulgarian messianism, which is to spiritually renew Europe [Heinzel 2011][92]. Actually, he tends thus to move from the fringe to mainstream national discourse, to include his teaching into the general rethinking of history, identity and attitude toward Europe, or better to say, to give an esoteric version of the national narrative. His followers writing either during the Communism period or following the White Brotherhood’s revival after 1989[93] use pretty much the same combination of national messianism and Western esotericism. Bogomilism is interpreted through the concepts of Kabbalah, Hermeticism, system of correspondences [Kirilov 2000; Simeon 1968[94]; Pašov 2007, 2008], and there is also the idea of Bogomil tarot [Simeon 1968; Pašov 2007]. From the (macro)historical standpoint Bogomilism is perceived as a national contribution to European spirituality; the Slavs are the sixth culture of the fifth race from which a new, sixth race will emerge [Pašov 2008: 32]. Here is one example of reinterpretation of medieval dualism: Satanael is the negative side of God, the negative pole of creative energy, because everything rests on the principles of energy and polarity [Pašov 2008: 154–156]. It is not only about modern terms – «energy» and «pole» actually transform dualism into a kind of holism.
There were some ideas of reviving Bogomilism in Yugoslavia between the two World wars. One of its propagators, Mladen Đ. Protić, was officially prosecuted in 1934 for blasphemy, insulting the Church and preaching Bogomilism ([Radić 2009: 229–230]; cf. [Dvorniković 1990: 968]). Still, his ideas didn’t differ much from contemporary popular Spiritualism [Radić 2009: 229–230]. But this was restricted to an individual action without some reverberations in the public sphere. The fall of Communism gave impetus to the appearance of new magical movements and alternative religions[95]. Despite this, no one came up with the idea of reviving the Bogomil movement. The esoteric milieu consists mainly of local branches of international movements. Just in the past several years some movements bearing Neo-Bogomil stamp have appeared – two in Bosnia and one in Croatia.
First group is located in the Bosnian town of Tuzla. Founded by Finnish national Antti Tepponen, it started to work in 2002, and was officially registered in 2005[96]. It uses completely Mediaeval terminology ascribed to the Bosnian Church. The name of the group is the Bosnian Church: «Krstjanska zajednica» (Christian Community; the word «krstjani» which they use is mediaeval form typical of Bosnian patarens). Terms describing the organization and functions are also taken from historical sources: «djed» (elder) as head, «strojnici»are members of the Church council. However when we come to the teachings themselves we see immediately that they have no connection with any mediaeval heterodox belief, especially with dualism. The Bosnian Church is actually an evangelical Pentecostal denomination and the Credo is based on the Lausanne Covenant. They believe in the second baptism of Holy Spirit and in the gift of languages. However, the official site and public appearances insist on that historical continuity. The Pentecostal essence is presented in local terms with powerful historical associations. The underlining of the heretical teaching actually shows that contemporary minority groups can identify themselves with the image of mediaeval heretics. On the other hand, emphasizing Bosnian name and Bosnian character of the community is in the line with semi-official tendencies which insists on the «Bosnian identity» as opposed to particular national identities. By supporting them, the group is trying to get official support in return. Still, it has no connections to either mediaeval Bogomilism or modern magical movements.
The other group is located in the domain of web-culture[97]. It also calls itself the «Bosnian Church» and it insists on a demarcation line between itself and Tuzlan group. The teaching is portrayed as continuation of old Bogomilism and actually appears so: there are two gods, the good one – creator of spiritual world, and the evil one who created the material world. Consequently, asceticism is recommended, no institutional religion is needed, neither the rituals – man should speak to God directly. At the same time some contradictory concepts of obviously modern nature are present: the religion is presented as a symbiosis of early Christianity, dualism and Slavic paganism glorifying nature – which hardly goes hand in hand with the rejection of the material world, but it has been taken from modern readings of Bogomilism. Insistences of autochthonism of «Bosnian teaching» and Bosnian patriotism, as distinct from Serbian, Croatian or Muslim, reveal a political subtext here, too. The statement that the community has no organized cult nor places for gathering, and that the interiority of every person should be a temple, although it might be in accordance with historical presentation of Bogomilism (avoidance of built temples), reminds us that this community remains in the ephemeral and illusive world of virtual reality – we don’t know whether it really exist as a community or as just an individually created web-page. Still, its self-presentation says something about relationships in contemporary society in Bosnia and the identity problems – actually, more about it than about NeoNeo-Manicheism. This web phenomenon can be seen in a broader picture as (ab)use of Bogomilism in contemporary culture in Bosnia[98].
With the next group, we are finally on the esotericism grounds. The Balkan Bogumil Center, or the Slavic Church of Bogomils and the Holy Grail, has two temples in Croatia, in Zagreb and in Split[99]. The exact number of the members is not known. Once a week there is an introductory lesson and on Sundays, Communion of the Grail is celebrated. According to statements from the officials, members are not only from Croatia, but also from neighboring countries. According to the emic history, Bogomilism is of hyperborean origin, 5 billion years old, representing the Ur-religion of mankind; it is universal spirituality which can unify religions under the guidance of the Virgin Mary. This tradition was preserved in the Church led by Mary Magdalene (opposed to Peter’s Church). Magdalene is the mother of Joseph of Arimathea (guardian of the Holy Grail) and father is Christ; Bogomils belong to the filiation of the Church of Magdalene and the Grail‘s keepers. Apostle Andrew brought Christianity i. e. the teachings of the Grail and the good God to the Slavic land of Scythia. Due to the Byzantine persecutions, the Grail was transferred to Bulgaria and then to the West. The Bogomil teaching is preserved among elders of Eastern Church, those at Solovki (a monastery, later part of the Gulag). According to the cosmology and anthropology of the teaching, this world is ruled by Rex mundi (Jahve or Elohim from the Old Testament) who created the material world and evil; his worshippers are organized religions and churches. The good God created the heavens and souls. Mankind consists of the adamits and seraphits. Adamits passed through «adaptive transformation», imposed by Rex mundi, a kind of hypnosis. But following the metanoia, under the guidance of the leader, souls go toward their seraphitic state. Neophytes should pass through the stages of ascension and perfection (for which Cathar terms melioramentum and consolamentum are used) when they are enabled to cast off hypnosis and to learn about the God of love, about human potentials, and to actually become God. Individual transformation shows the way to new civilization – theocivilization led by seraphits, not by adamits. The prophecies of the leader, Blessed John (Ioann), given to him in revelations of Virgin Mary predict the time of great catastrophes but also the advent of theoanthropocentrism, time of Holy Spirit, Slavic theogamy. The Grail is kept in the depths of the ocean, where good land of Atlantis withdrew, and which will rise again.
A closer look at the teachings of the movement and the leader – Ioann Bereslavsky – reveals immediately that the Balkan Bogomil Center actually represents just a local offshoot of originally Russian and nowadays international movement – Mother of God Center or the Church of the Mother of God Derzhavnaya [Akhmetova 2005: 207–238; Kokin 2003; Falikov
2000][100]. It uses at least ten names, and this one has something of a local color – in the same way as in Spain it uses the name Cathar Church and Bereslavsky is called Juan de San Grial. In short, this is bricolage using elements of Orthodoxy (liturgical symbolism, Russian tradition and history), Catholicism (Marianism)[101], New Age,[102] Gnosticism. It started as a branch of the Catacombal Orthodox Church of rightist political orientation where Bereslavsky allegedly was ordained (as priest, possibly as bishop). The role of the Catacombal Orthodox Church in this case corresponds to the role that episcopi vagantes and «small churches» have had in Western new magical movements [Introvigne 2003: 244–247]. It seems that over the course of time the movement moved from a loosely Orthodox underground church, through prophetic and Marianite cult, to a more and more Gnostic new esoteric group. This gradual increase of the Gnostic elements explains the importance of Bogomilism in it. Although it includes heterogeneous elements, I will point out only those most similar to classical Bogomilism. These are: the fall of preexistent souls into the matter; rejection of the God of the Old Testament, creator of material world, as evil demiurge, which results in emphasized asceticism, antisexual and anticorporeal views. Of Gnostic hue is the topic of Eve’s carnal union with the snake-devil; humanity thus stems from two branches: cainites and adamites, nowadays mixed. This can be found in medieval Bogomils writings [Obolensky 1948: 208, 227–228; Lambert 1977: 21; Stoyanov 2000: 60, 88, 266–267, 277, 348–349]; being of Gnostic origin, it is known to Jewish tradition, too as targums [Stroumsa 1983: 35–53], «Zohar» and «Bahir». However, it is present in modern literature (Nerval’s «Voyage au orient», 1851) as well as in esotericism, too: in 19th century luciferianism and antimasonic literature of the same period, in Robert Ambelain’s interpretation of the Hiramic legend («La Franc-maçonnerie oubliée», 1985), in Rudolf Steiner («The Temple Legend and the Golden Legend»,1904–1906). On the other hand, rich liturgical ritual and veneration of Cross (which plays great role) are foreign to historical image of Bogomils who are said to have rejected the cross[103]. Bereslavsky accepts those historiographical theories that support linkage between the Balkan Bogomils and the Cathars, transforming thus scholar theory into emic history. The connection between Cathars and Grail, on the other hand, although firmly refuted by medievalists long ago [Runciman 1999: 187], entered contemporary esotericism, consequently it comes to the Balkan Bogumil Center through the emic tradition of Western esotericism (in the most significant form as constructed by Antonin Gadal (1877–1962), Déodat Roché (1877–1978) and Otto Rahn (1904–1939)). The connection between the Bogomils and Grail did not play such an important role in esotericism, and I believe that we can judge it as linkage between Western and Eastern topics in the movement. The Grail becomes Balkanized. While contemporary Balkan societies valuate themselves by comparing to the criteria they perceive as European (including more mundane aspirations of joining the EU), this type of narrative inverts the roles: esoteric light comes from the Balkan East; the theme of Grail which marked European culture now becomes «our» gift to the West. The marriage of Christ and Mary Magdalene is present in reports about Cathars [Stoyanov 2000: 278–280]. To certain extent it is used by Ambelain (Christ and Salome in «Jésus ou Le mortel secret des templiers», 1970), but it gained popularity since «Holy Blood, Holy Grail» (1982) by Henry Lincoln, Michael Baigent und Richard Leigh and «The Da Vinci Code» (2003) by Dan Brown. Still, by emphasizing dualist and anti-cosmic elements, this movement is closer to classical Gnostic worldview than contemporary Gnostic revival, which is strongly marked by Jungian psychologism and New Age holism [Burns 2007]. This is not surprising knowing that even Jung’s gnosticism is, as Quispel showed long ago, different from the gnostic currents of Antiquity [Quispel 1975]. (The other contemporary exemption is the very anti-cosmic Lectorium Rosicrucianum). New Age, too, does not perceive the body as prison and does not accept gnostic otherworldliness [Hanegraaff 1996: 265].
In conclusion, I fear that enthusiastic reader must be disappointed in a way; there is no big Bogomil revival on the Balkans. Still, some conclusions can be made. The issue of Bogomilism is transferred to the sphere of history; however not history as an academic discipline, but rather history as an interpretational tool for contemporary problems and for interpreting one‘s own identity. History in modern Balkan societies has often played a role which might otherwise be played by religion or philosophy. Bogomils were perceived in this light and esoteric readings of Bogomilism were pushed to the fringe. Those interested in historical reading of Bogomilism were not interested in esotericism, and those interested in Gnosticism and esotericism found their path in movements coming from Europe, such as O.T.O. and anthroposophy. Also, I suspect that dualism, rejection of the material world and body, and somewhat crude mythology of classical Bogomils[104][105] didn’t have much appeal to the modern Gnostics. The only real Neo-Bogomil movement is of foreign origin and it uses the Bogomil name for legitimization of its syncretic teaching. This «invention of tradition» is not historical or national but in line with rhetoric of new religious movements. However, it still plays on the Slavic and national sentiment in the region. National-political and esoterical discourses overlap.
From the cross-cultural perspective, that mixture of local and national identity with contemporary esotericism makes it similar to Neo-Cathar movements (linked to Occitan nationalism and folklorism), and comparison of European and Balkan imagology in this sense could be interesting for future research. The Cathar topic was incorporated into constructed histories and macrohistories of Western esoteric movements, in a frame much broader than Neo-Catharism, precisely because the Cathars were perceived as part of Western-European culture; Bogomils were not[106]. The Bogomils share the fate of other Balkan images, as Maria Todorova demonstrated [Todorova 2009: 188–189]. They, like the entire whole Balkans, are not entirely Western, but at the same time they are not exotic enough to become the «mysterious» East.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Akhmetova 2005 – Akhmetova M. V. Ožidanie konca sveta v religioznykh subkul’turakh postsovetskoi Rossii (The Anticipation of the End of the World in Religious Subcultures of Post-Soviet Russia) // Sovremenaya rossiyskaia mifologiia / Ed. by M. V. Akhmetova. Moscow: RGGU, 2005. P. 207–238.
Aivanhov 1985 – Aivanhov O. M. La force sexuelle ou le Dragon ailé. Paris: Prosveta, 1985.
Aivanhov 2003 – Aivanhov O. M. La pierre philosophale. Paris: Prosveta, 2003.
Aivanhov 2005 – Aivanhov O. M. Sons and Daughters of God. Prosveta, 2005.
Aivanhov 2008 – Aivanhov O. M. Moć misli (Puissances de la pensèe). Beograd: Glosarijum, 2008.
Aivanhov 2010 – Aivanhov O. M. Joga ishrane (Le Yoga de la nutrition), Beograd: Glosarijum, 2010.
Bozoky 2006 – Bozoky E. Bogomilism // Dictionary of Gnosis and Western Esotericism / Ed. by W. J. Hanegraaff. Leiden, Boston: E. J. Brill, 2006. P. 192–194.
Burns 2007 – Burns D. Seeking Ancient Wisdom in the New Age. New Age and Neognostic Commentaries on The Gospel of Thomas // Polemical Encounters. Esoteric Discourse and Its Others / Ed. by O. Hammer and K. von Stuckrad. Leiden, Boston: E. J. Brill, 2007. P. 254–289.
Ćošković 2005 – Ćošković P. Crkva bosanska u XV stoljeću (The Bosnian Church in the 15th century). Sarajevo: Institut za istoriju, 2005.
Djurdjević 2013 – Djurdjević G. Hidden wisdom in the ill-ordered house: a short survey of occultism in Former Yugoslavia // Occultism in a Global Perspective / Ed. by H. Bogdan and G. Djurdjević. Durham: Acumen, 2013. P. 79–100.
Dokle 2011 – Dokle N. Bogomilizam i etnogeneza torbeša kukske gore (Bogomilism and Ethnogenesis of the Torbeshi of Kuk Mountain). Prizren: Alem, 2011.
Dvorniković 1990 – Dvorniković V. Karakterologija Jugoslovena (The Characterology of Yugoslavs). Beograd, Niš: Prosveta, 1990 [1940].
Falikov 2000 – Falikov B. Z. The Center of Our Lady and Counterculture // CESNUR 14th International Conference. Riga, August 2000 // [URL]: www.cesnur.org/ conferences/riga2000/falikov.htm (date accessed: 17 July, 2014).
Frick 2005 – Frick K. R. H. Licht und Finsternis. Okkulte Geheimgesellschaften bis zur Wende des 20. Jahrhunderts. Bd. II. Wiesbaden: Marixverlag, 2005.
Gadal 1960 – Gadal A. Op Weg naar de Heilige Graal. Haarlem: Rozekruis Pers, 1960.
Hammer 2004 – Hammer O. Claiming Knowledge: Strategies of Epistemology from Theosophy to the New Age. Leiden, Boston: E. J. Brill, 2004.
Hanegraaff 1996 – Hanegraaff W. New Age Religion and Western Culture. Esotericism in the Mirror of Secular Thought. Leiden, New York, Köln: E. J. Brill, 1996.
Heinzel 2011 – Heinzel T. Slavic Messianism in Bulgaria. The White Brotherhood and the Question of National Identity 1920–1944 // International Journal for the Study of New Religions. 2011. N 2(1). P. 55–75.
Introvigne 2003 – Introvigne M. Il cappello del mago. I nuovi movimenti magici, dallo spiritismo al satanismo. Milano: SugarCo, 2003.
Introvigne 2006 – Introvigne M. Deunov, Peter // Dictionary of Gnosis and Western Esotericism / Ed. by W. J. Hanegraaff. Leiden, Boston: E. J. Brill, 2006. P. 192–194.
Kirilov 2000 – Kirilov I. Istinata za bogomilite (The Truth about Bogomils). Sofiia: Hriker, 2000.
Kokin 2003 – Kokin I. Bogorodičnyi centr: istoriia, veroučenie, religioznaia žizn’ (The Virgin Mary’s Centre: History, Teachings, Religious Life). Sergiev Posad: Troice-Sergieva Lavra, 2003 // [URL]: http://www.disus.ru/knigi/191114-1- moskovskaya-duhovnaya-akademiya-kafedra-sektovedeniya-diakon-ilyakokin-bogorodichniy-centr-istoriya-verouchenie-religioznaya.php (date accessed: 17 July, 2014).
Kondakov 2011 – Kondakov R. Bogomilskite vodači (The Bogomil Vanguards). Sofiia, 2011 // [URL]:http://www.beinsadouno.com (date accessed: 17 July, 2014).
Lambert 1977 – Lambert M. D. Medieval Heresy. Popular Movements from Bogomil to Hus. London: Edward Arnold, 1977.
Le Forestier 1970 – Le Forestier R. La franc-maçonnerie templière et occultiste aux XVIIIe et XIXe siècles. Paris-Louvain: Subier-Montaigne, Editions Nauwelaerts, 1970.
Leshchinskiy 2005 – Leshchinskiy A. Osobennosti Bogodorichnogo dvizhenia v Rossii (The Pecculiarities of the Mother of God’s Movement in Russia). M.: ROIR, 2005.
Lixfeld 1971 – Lixfeld H. Gott und Teufel als Weltschöpfer. München: Wilhelm Fink Verlag, 1971.
Loos 1974 – Loos M. Dualist Heresy in the Middle Ages. Prague: Academia Publishing House, 1974.
Nedeljković 2010 – Nedeljković S. Čast, krv i suze (Honour, Blood, and Tears). Beograd:
Zlatni zmaj, Odeljenje za etnologiju i antropologiju Filozofskog fakulteta, 2007. Neli 1964 – Neli R. Le phenomene cathare. Paris: P. U. F, 1964.
Nikčević 1999 – Nikčević V. Gnostička kultura u Crnoj Gori (Gnostic Culture in Montenegro). Podgorica: Narodna biblioteka Radosav Ljumović, 1999.
Obolensky 1948 – Obolensky D. The Bogomils: A Study in Balkan neo-Manicheism.
Cambridge: The Cambridge University Press, 1948.
Pašov 2007 – Pašov V. Istoričeskiiat păt na Bialoto bratstvo prez vekovete 7 (zapadnata ezoterična tradicija-maniheystvo-bogomilstvo-rozenkroycerstvo) (The Historical Course of the White Brotherhood Through the Centuries 7. Western Esoterical Tradition-Manicheism, Bogomilism, Rosicrucianism). Sofiia: Avir, 2007.
Pašov 2008 – Pašov V. Bogomilstvoto, păt na săvăršenite (Bogomilism: The Way of the Perfect). Sofiia: Avir, 2008.
Quispel 1975 – Quispel G. Hesse, Jung und die Gnosis // Gnostic Studies II / Istanbul: Nederlands Historisch-Archaeologisch Instituut in het Nabije Oosten, 1975. P. 241–258.
Racin 1966 – Racin K. Bogomilite: stihovi i proza (Bogomils: Poems and Prose). Skopje: Kultura, 1966. P. 180–195.
Radić 2009 – Radić R. Narodna verovanja, religija i spiritizam u srpskom društvu 19. i u prvoj polovini 20. veka (Folk Beliefs, Religion and Spiritualism in Serbian Society in the 19th and the First Half of the 20th century). Belgrade: The Institute for Recent History of Serbia, 2009.
Rigo 1989 – Rigo A. Monaci esicasti e monaci bogomili. Firenze: Leo Olschi, 1989.
Runciman 1999 – Runciman S. The Medieval Manichee: A Study of the Christian Dualist Heresy. Cambridge, New York: The Cambridge University Press, 1999.
Servier 1998 – Servier J. Catharisme // Dictionnaire critique de l’esoterisme / Ed. by J. Servier. Paris: P. U. F, 1989.
Simeon 1968 – Simeon, Episkop. Bogomilstvo i bogomili (Bogomilism and Bogomils). Sofiia: no publisher [Bialo Bratstvo], 1968.
Stoyanov 1994 – Stoyanov Yu. The Hidden Tradition in Europe. London, New York: Arkana, 1994.
Stoyanov 2000 – Stoyanov Yu. The Other God: Dualist Religions from Antiquity to Cathar Heresy. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2000.
Stoyanov 2002 – Stoyanov Yu. Esoteric and Initiatory Traditions in Ancient and Medieval Gnostic Dualism // Sulla soglia del sacro: esoterismo ed iniziazione / Ed. by A. Panaino. Milano: Mimesis Edizioni, 2002. P. 122–146.
Stroumsa 1983 – Stroumsa G. The Other Seed: Studies in Gnostic Mythology. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1983.
Stuckrad 2008 – Stuckrad K. von. Esoteric Discourse and the European History of Religion. In Search of New Interpretational Framework // Symposium on Western Esotericism. Abo, Finland, 15–17 August, 2007 / Ed. by T. Ahlbäck. Åbo: Donner Institute for Research in Religious and Cultural History, 2008. P. 230–232.
Švat-Glbova 2010 – Švat-Glbova G. Haeresis bulgarica v bălgarskoto kulturno soznanie na XIX i XX vek (Haeresis Bulgarica in Bulgarian Cultural Consciousness in the 19th and 20th centuries). Sofiia: Universitetsko izdatelstvo Sv. Kliment Ohridski, 2010.
Todorova 2009 – Todorova M. Imagining the Balkans. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, 2009.
Webb 1976 – Webb J. The Occult Establishment. La Salle: A Library press Book, Open Court Pub Co., 1976.
ТАЙНЫЕ ОБЩЕСТВА
Е. Л. Кузьмишин
КОДЕКС «COPIALE»
История вопроса
Кодекс «Copiale» возник словно из небытия и мгновенно обрел всемирную известность 25–26 октября 2011 г., когда практически одновременно новостные агентства разных стран сообщили об успешной попытке расшифровать старинный манускрипт, предпринятой международной группой исследователей под эгидой Университета Уппсалы.
Новость основана на научном докладе, сделанном специалистом в области применения компьютерных технологий в лингвистике Кевином Найтом на 4-м семинаре по проблеме создания и функционирования сопоставимых кодированных корпусов в рамках 49-й Ежегодной сессии Ассоциации компьютерной лингвистики в Портленде, штат Орегон, 24 июня 2011 г. [Knight, Megyesi, Schaefer 2011: 2]. По словам Найта, сотрудника Технологического института Виттерби при Университете Южной Калифорнии, который ранее получил известность как исследователь знаменитого «манускрипта Войнича», впрочем, не сумевший пока его расшифровать [Reddy, Knight 2012], международная исследовательская группа, в которую, кроме него самого, входили ученые Беата Медьяши и Кристиана Шефер из Университета Уппсалы, потратила несколько лет на расшифровку данного манускрипта при помощи специального программного обеспечения, сначала транслитерирующего рукописный текст в печатные формы, а затем проводящего кластеризацию текстовых единиц (знаков и их повторяющихся сочетаний) для последующей дешифровки [Ibid.: 5].
История самого документа, который изучался командой под руководством Найта, полна нестыковок и неясностей. Сам автор исследования утверждает, что документ попал к нему по окончании «холодной войны» из частной коллекции, куда он был перемещен из фондов Восточно-Берлинской академии наук (Deutsche Akademie der Wissenschaften
zu Berlin) [Computer scientist 2011]. Время обнаружения документа ав торами исследования не указывается, но приблизительно его можно определить, используя замечание Найта о том, что первые попытки дешифровки нашли отражение в его работе (в соавторстве с А. Нейром, Н. Рэтодом и К. Ямадой) «Независимый анализ в решении проблем дешифровки» за 2006 г. [Knight, Megyesi, Schaefer 2011: 5, 9]. С другой стороны, по словам Шефер, исследовательская работа над манускриптом велась «еще в 1970-е гг.» [Stein 2011], хотя в специальной литературе не удается обнаружить какие-либо публикации по данной теме.
Восточно-Берлинская академия наук представляла собой административное объединение ученых Германской Демократической Республики. Вскоре после объединения Германии она испытала ряд преобразований и изменений, которые в конечном итоге привели к ее реформированию в 1990 г. и окончательному расформированию в 1992–1993 гг., когда на ее месте были основаны Берлинско-Бранденбургская академия наук (правопреемница организационной структуры) и Берлинское научное общество Лейбница (образовано приблизительно тремястами бывшими членами Академии как некоммерческая организация) [Von der Kurfürstlich 2012]. Экстраполируя известный опыт советских научных институтов и их архивов после распада СССР на аналогичные учреждения просоветской Восточной Европы, нетрудно допустить, что фактически любой исторический документ мог оказаться в частной коллекции и стать достоянием исследователей из Университета Уппсалы множеством различных путей. Однако задача определения происхождения документа в настоящей работе нами не ставится.
Подробные результаты исследования представлены авторами на отдельной странице официального сайта университета [Knight, Megyesi, Schaefer 2012]: в частности, данный ресурс предоставляет пользователям возможность ознакомиться с полнотекстовым файлом манускрипта в доступных читаемых цифровых форматах (постраничная фотокопия с обложками, расшифровка на немецком языке, перевод на английский язык). Таким образом, сам факт существования документа, равно как и его основные характеристики (криптография, возраст) не вызывают сомнений.
Также подлинность старинного документа подтверждается его копией того же временного периода, к которому авторы исследования относят имеющийся у них кодекс «Copiale», хранящейся с 1920 г. в ар хиве федеральной земли Нижняя Саксония [Über Geheimsprachen 2012]. Кодекс был обнаружен еще в январе 1920 г. По сопроводительным документам, он относился к архивному фонду умершего 19 апреля 1775 г. председателя Верховного суда Вольфенбюттеля Фридриха Августа фон Вельтхайм цу Харбке (знаменитого библиофила и собирателя древностей родного края [Neuer Nekrolog von der Deutschen 1836: 533]), переданному в уже упомянутый архив 2 мая 1776 г. тайным советником фон Прауном [Über Geheimsprachen 2012].
Расшифрованный текст четко подразделяется на три неравные части, связанные между собой только предположительным использованием всех трех частей в рамках одной организации.
Первая часть (с. 1–27) представляет собой ритуальный свод оригинального Ордена окулистов; вторая часть (с. 27–68) – ритуальный свод трех степеней обычной масонской символической ложи; третья часть (с. 69–105) – ритуальный текст масонской дополнительной («высшей») степени шотландского мастера. Из этих частей наибольший интерес представляет собой первая, поскольку она содержит описание не имеющего аналогов в иных ритуальных текстах церемониального свода оригинального «тайного» общества, обладающего собственной спецификой и отличающегося от известных масонских и розенкрейцерских организаций своего времени и своей географической местности.
Орден окулистов
По данным немецкого исследователя Алоиза Хеннинга [Henning 1999: 65], «высокопросвещенное общество (или орден) окулистов» (Hocherleuchtete Oculisten-Gesellschaft / Orden) существовало в Вольфенбюттеле (Нижняя Саксония) в 1742–1763 гг. в качестве аналога масонской ложи и наравне с иными «тайными» обществами своего времени, которые изобиловали в германских землях еще со Средних веков, о чем неоднократно упоминает в своем фундаментальном труде Георг Шустер [Шустер 2005, 1: 212–214; 2: 33–36]. По сведениям Хеннинга, это общество объединяло в своих рядах специалистов во всех возможных областях деятельности, связанной с лечением глаз: собственно врачей, практиковавших глазную хирургию, вспомогательный медицинский персонал, аптекарей, а также оптиков и технических работников в смежных об ластях, вплоть до шлифовальщиков линз. Целями, преследовавшимися обществом, были распространение офтальмологического искусства, пропаганда его пользы и действенности, а также отстаивание «доброго имени» глазной хирургии в глазах общественного мнения и его защита от происков всевозможных шарлатанов от медицины [Henning 1999: 65].
Необходимо отметить, что репутация врачебной профессии вообще и глазной хирургии в частности в указанный исторический период не являлась в глазах общественного мнения бесспорной, преимущественно по причине активного вовлечения в данный вид деятельности лиц сомнительной репутации и профессиональной компетенции, о чем также упоминает Хеннинг в другом своем исследовании по истории офтальмологии XVIII в. [Henning 1989: 256–258].
Косвенным подтверждением его выводов являются результаты исследований ряда специалистов по истории медицины на материале других стран, в частности, Англии, где в тот же исторический период прославился хирург Джон Тэйлор, специализировавшийся на оперативном лечении катаракты, «королевский офтальмиатр», обвиняемый (нельзя сказать, чтобы достаточно обоснованно) в смерти своих пациентов И.- С. Баха и Г.-Ф. Генделя [Wade 2008: 969–972].
В нескольких биографических работах, посвященных Тэйлору, исследователи указывают на сомнительную репутацию врачебного искусства в материковой Европе и Англии первой половины XVIII в. в целом и глазной хирургии в частности. Врачи зачастую становились объектами насмешек, изображались в сатирических памфлетах и карикатурах шарлатанами и обманщиками, приравнивались в знахарям и сельским целителям [Coats 1933: 132–219]. Отсюда можно заключить с высокой степенью вероятности, что основными целями объединения всех работников данной сферы деятельности в некое тайное общество на основе традиционной для Германии схемы профессиональной корпорации (Verein, Verband) были сплочение ввиду осуждения общественным мнением, применение коллективных усилий для улучшения имиджа своего рода занятий в глазах общественного мнения, а также традиционная для обществ подобного рода в Европе Нового времени коммерческая и бытовая взаимопомощь (совместные банкеты, касса взаимопомощи, опека вдов и сирот членов корпорации, материальное обеспечение погребения и т. д.) [Шустер 2005, 1: 311].
Примечательно, однако, что, в отличие от большинства аналогич ных обществ того времени, в высокопросвещенное общество окулистов принимались женщины, которые могли даже достигать степени мастера; исследователи не уточняют, являлись ли они, согласно традициям аналогичных профессиональных союзов более позднего времени, женами, вдовами, дочерьми, сестрами, иными родственницами мужчин – членов общества, или они могли быть работницами профессиональных сфер, связанных с офтальмологией, не связанными родственными узами с членами общества мужского пола.
Хеннинг указывает, что Общество окулистов не имело большого влияния на жизнь Вольфенбюттеля, не пользовалось популярностью и вряд ли было вообще известно кому-либо, кроме его членов [Henning 1999: 68]. Впрочем, поскольку сами документы общества содержат неоднократные упоминания о его тайном характере, это не должно удивлять исследователя.
Основным символом Общества окулистов являлось изображение глаза. Это совершенно очевидно и логично, и хотя исследователи утверждают, что к 1763 г. деятельность Общества прекратилась, в той же работе Хеннинга с ссылкой на труд Астрит Шмидт-Буркхардт «Зрячие картины: мотивы изображения глаз в живописи, начиная с XIX в.» (1992) указывается, что приписываемый данному Обществу медальон с изображением глаза связан с историей развития жанра «портретов глаз» в немецкой живописи начала XIX в. [Ibid.].
Единственной специфической ритуальной чертой данного общества, выделяемой практически всеми авторами исследовательских материалов о нем, является наличие в его посвятительной церемонии особой части – «глазной операции». Последняя, вне всяких сомнений – профессиональное привнесение в этот довольно простой ритуал, во всех прочих своих частях являющийся неспецифическим и повторяющим большинство ритуальных образцов как корпоративной немецкой культуры, так и ранней масонской обрядности, характерной для его развития до 50-х гг. XVIII в., т. е. до начала периода лавинообразного формирования дополнительных степеней и разработки соответствующих им пространных и значительно более насыщенных ритуальных текстов.
Сам ритуальный текст несложен, состоит преимущественно из описания простых и типичных церемониальных действий и вольного пересказа текстовых вставок в форме указаний по их произнесению весьма обще го характера. Подробнее особенности ритуала пояснены в примечаниях к тексту его русского перевода [Кузьмишин 2013: 45–55].
Дата добавления: 2020-01-07; просмотров: 203; Мы поможем в написании вашей работы! |
Мы поможем в написании ваших работ!