Venerable Seraphim of Sarov and Russian literature. Collection of articles

Contents From the editorial board Under the gracious influence of the Venerable Hieromonk Cornelius (Apukhtin). Word from the shepherd about St. Seraphim Baturov T.K. Venerable Seraphim of Sarov and Russian spirituality Zelenina Ya.E. The image of St. Seraphim of Sarov in the lithography of the Seraphim-Diveevsky Monastery Ryabiy M.M. Who recorded “The Conversation of Father Seraphim”? Motorin A.V. The Tabor joy of Saint Seraphim of Sarov and the bright laughter of Gogol Melnik V.I. Reverend Seraphim of Sarov and the Simbirsk intelligentsia (Religious education of I.A. Goncharov) Novikova A.A. Epigraph from “The Life of Elder Seraphim” in the plot of the Christmas story by N.S. Leskova “The Beast” Repina T.S. Essay by I.S. Shmelev “The Grace of St. Seraphim": experience of spiritual and physical healing Sokhryakov Yu.I. Decoration of the Russian Land Spiritual foundations of Russian literature Archpriest Alexy Averyanov. Reflection on the meaning of the Nativity Fast Gladilin M.S. Church of the Life-Giving Trinity in Vyazemy Shmeleva A.V. Chronicler of troubled times. A.C. Pushkin about the historical destinies of Russia Fedoseeva E.N. “Space of another being” in the lyrics of A.S. Pushkina, E.A. Boratynsky and P.A. Vyazemsky Kasatkina V.N. The prayer meaning of the poem by F.I. Tyutchev “Silentium!” Petrova L.E. The image of the Virgin Mary in the poetry of F.I. Tyutcheva Kiseleva I.A. The idea of ​​the Kingdom in the poetic world of M.Yu. Lermontova Averyanova M.A. Comprehension of H.V. Gogol's secrets of deification Zverev V.P. Mother of God motifs in the poetic works of F.N. Glinka Zastrozhnova E.M. The problem of poverty and wealth in the light of the Christian tradition (Russian magazine criticism of the 1840s) Evstigneeva Yu.A. A spiritual look at the title image in the play by A.N. Ostrovsky “Dowry” Ivanova E.M. Religious and poetic world of A.A. Feta Abrashova E.A. A.P.’s attitude Chekhov (based on the writer’s notebooks and letters) Vasneva A.M. The life and work of the Orthodox children's writer A.F. Platonova Alekseeva L.F. V.A. Sumbatov - Russian Orthodox poet Hieromonk Korniliy Apukhtin on a visit to St. Seraphim. To the Kursk origins Kopytseva N.M. Come to me! Come! Baturova T.K. “Seraphim” means “fiery” Information about the authors Illustrations Lifetime portrait of St. Seraphim of Sarov, located in the study of S. A. Nilus The collection, prepared by the Department of Russian Classical Literature of the Moscow State Regional University, is dedicated to the saint of the Russian land - St. Seraphim of Sarov and is a kind of link between two great dates - the 100th anniversary of the canonization and the 250th anniversary of the saint’s birth. The authors of the articles are clergy of churches near Moscow, specialists from the Institute of World Literature named after. A.M. Gorky, the Russian Academy of Sciences, art historians, museum workers, teachers of universities in Moscow, Veliky Novgorod, Orel, Michurinsk, Khanty-Mansiysk. They reveal the role of St. Seraphim in the development of Russian culture, represent the height of the spiritual feat of the great elder, and reveal the moral foundations of Russian classical literature. The collection presents the unity of religious and cultural issues, revealing the Orthodox origins of Russian classical literature. For philology students, literary scholars, teachers, secondary school students and all Orthodox readers interested in the spiritual problems of Russian culture. The collection was prepared by the Department of Russian Classical Literature of the Moscow State Regional University for two memorable dates - the 100th anniversary of the canonization and the 250th anniversary of the birth of St. Seraphim of Sarov. Despite the large number of serious and authoritative works about St. Seraphim, every new word is important, adding addition or clarification to the problem of the influence of the great saint of God on Russian spirituality and culture. The articles in the collection reveal the power of the saint’s beneficial influence on writers of the 19th and 20th centuries. The influence of Father Seraphim was determined not only by lifetime meetings with him, but also by the spiritual light emanating from the saint. The influence of St. Seraphim, his spiritual gift, and preaching word found their artistic embodiment in the works of A.S. Pushkina, M.Yu. Lermontov, F.I. Tyutcheva, N.M. Yazykova, F.N. Glinka, N.V. Gogol, I.A. Goncharova, N.S. Leskova, I.S. Shmeleva. This is what is discussed in the articles in the collection. In the section “Under the gracious influence of the saint,” the image of the saint of God is visibly present, and in “Spiritual Foundations of Russian Literature” general religious problems embodied in the works of Orthodox Russian writers are revealed. Here, too, the influence of the saint is palpable, for the spirituality of Russian society was largely determined by his prayerful presence. The section “On a Visit to Saint Seraphim” conveys the impressions of our contemporaries from pilgrimages to the places of spiritual exploits of Father Seraphim. The union of clergy, literary scholars, cultural and artistic figures presented in the collection is gratifying. This unity of the spiritual forces of Russian society is significant for our time. The geography of the research works in the collection is wide. Literary scholars from Moscow, Veliky Novgorod, Michurinsk, Orel, and Khanty-Mansiysk presented their works. We hope that the collection “St. Seraphim of Sarov and Russian Literature” will provide assistance in the practice of university and school work and will contribute to the cause of spiritual enlightenment. Under the gracious influence of the monk Hieromonk Cornelius (Apukhtin). Word from the Shepherd about St. Seraphim St. Seraphim of Sarov is a shining example of Christian holiness. He reached the highest limit of spiritual perfection, became a tireless worker in the field of Christ, having acquired the abundant grace of the Holy Spirit, and filled his vessel with priceless beads of inexhaustible love for God and people. The priest greeted everyone who came to him for advice with words of sincere Christian love, which filled them with joy and warmed their hearts. From a young age, St. Seraphim loved the Lord and His Most Pure Mother, dedicated himself to their service, spending his entire life in fasting, prayer and labor. It is impossible to describe all the virtues that he acquired through spiritual exploits by the grace of the Holy Spirit. This was one of those people about whom the holy Apostle Paul said: “Those of whom the whole world was not worthy wandered in deserts and mountains, in caves and caves of the earth (Heb. 11:38). The monastic way of life, chosen by the Monk Seraphim, is the lot of the few. This path requires the concentration of all mental strength, a deep understanding of Christian doctrine, unshakable faith, firm determination, and tireless work. But first of all, one must hear in the heart the call of the Mother of God, for She Herself chooses those who could render selfless service to Her Son. The Most Holy Theotokos is the Guide of every monk. Abbess of all Orthodox monasteries. Monastic service is service to the Mother of God. The Monk Seraphim followed the path of this difficult ministry. The Queen of Heaven became his light, illuminated him with grace, and led him through ascetic deeds to the pinnacle of dispassion. The entire holy life of the saint is permeated with immeasurable love and veneration of the Most Holy Theotokos. This reverence is the hallmark of his bright soul. Father did everything according to the will of the Queen of Heaven. At the direction of the Most Holy Theotokos, he built the Diveyevo monastery - Her fourth inheritance on earth, and blessed to dig a ditch where the piles of the Most Holy Lady passed. He renewed the Theotokos rule, forgotten by the Orthodox. The Queen of Heaven herself gave this rule in the 8th century, and all Christians followed it, but then they forgot. Father Seraphim reminded us of this rule: he gave his blessing to go around the ditch around the Diveyevo Monastery, reading the Archangel's greeting to the Most Holy Theotokos 150 times. Twelve times the Lady of Heaven appeared to Father Seraphim. How did the Most Holy Theotokos enter the heart of the saint? The church historian Nicephorus Callistus preserved a legend about the appearance of the Most Holy Theotokos: She was “of average height or, as others say, somewhat more than average; golden hair; eyes are fast, with pupils the color of olives; eyebrows are arched and moderately black; oblong nose; blooming lips, filled with sweet speeches; the face is not round and not sharp, but somewhat oblong; arms and fingers are long" 1 . But what was amazing was not so much the immaculate and pure beauty of the body as the perfection of the soul of the Blessed Virgin. Saint Dionysius the Areopagite, three years after his conversion to Christianity, was honored to see the Blessed Virgin Mary face to face in Jerusalem, describes this meeting as follows: “When I was brought before the face of the god-like, most luminous Virgin, such a great and immeasurable Divine light enveloped me from the outside and inside, and such a wondrous fragrance of various aromas spread around me that neither my weak body nor my very spirit could bear it. such great and abundant signs and firstfruits of eternal bliss and glory. My heart fainted, my spirit fainted from Her glory and Divine Grace! The human mind cannot imagine any glory and honor higher than the bliss that I tasted then, unworthy, but honored by mercy and blessed beyond all understanding” 2. These legends about the appearance and inner spiritual perfection of the Most Holy Theotokos were preserved by the Church; this is how the Most Holy Virgin appeared before the Sarov Wonderworker. Not only miraculous visits, but also holy images of the Mother of God entered the heart of St. Seraphim. According to an ancient tradition accepted by the Orthodox Church, the holy evangelist Luke, a disciple of the holy Apostle Paul, knew the art of painting and was the first to paint the face of the Mother of God, satisfying the pious desire of believers who were not privileged to see the Most Holy Virgin during Her earthly life. From the first centuries, Christians began to venerate holy images. At the Seventh Ecumenical Council, the holy fathers defended the dogma of the veneration of icons. The honor given to the image refers to the Prototype. The Only Begotten Son of God, to accomplish our salvation, assumed human nature, became visible, tangible, and therefore depictable. St. Seraphim deeply understood the essence of Orthodox teaching and revered holy images. Two icons of the Mother of God especially entered the spiritual life of Father Seraphim. The first is “Kurskaya-Korennaya”. She illuminated the saint’s childhood. A native of ancient Kursk, he received healing from this miraculous icon. Her story is amazing. More than 700 years ago, in 1295, the icon was miraculously found by a hunter on the banks of the Tuskari River at the root of a tree, not far from the city of Rylsk, Kursk province, which is why it was called “Kursk-Root” 3. Residents of Rylsk built a chapel and placed a holy image in it. This icon protected Kursk from famine during the time of Boris Godunov, saved the city from the invasion of the Poles in 1612, and revealed many other miracles of intercession for the Russian Land. They brought the holy icon to Moscow. In gratitude to the Queen of Heaven, the residents of Kursk built a monastery, where the miraculous icon was placed in the cathedral church after her return from Moscow in 1615. Since 1618, in memory of the initial discovery of the icon and its transfer from Moscow to Kursk, the holy image was annually transported with a crowded religious procession from Kursk to the place of its appearance. It was from him that the miraculous healing of little Prokhor Moshnin, the future Venerable Seraphim, took place. And a few years later, from this icon, he directed his steps to the Sarov Monastery. The second icon, which had a special influence on the monk, is “Tenderness.” The exact name of the image is “The Unbrided Bride,” but the saint’s heart was filled with extraordinary tenderness and heavenly joy when he looked at the miraculous icon. The image was painted in the 18th century and conveys a great spiritual moment in the life of the Most Pure Virgin: in response to the gospel of Archangel Gabriel that She would become the Mother of the Savior, the Virgin Mary submissively bowed her head, folded her hands crosswise on her chest and said: “Behold, the Servant of the Lord, Bless Me according to Your word.” Complete submission to the Divine will was reflected in the pure and gentle face of the Mother of God. The icon became a hymn to virginity, dedicated to Divine service. This image stood in the corner of the monastic cell of the saint in the Sarov Monastery. He prayed before him, asked for the salvation of all those who came to him with faith and hope, gave those who came to venerate the holy icon, anointed them with oil from its lamp, presented them with crackers, and gave them holy water to drink. Before him, the elder passed away into eternity. In 1833, according to the will of Father Seraphim, the icon was transferred from Sarov to Diveevo, to the cell of the Queen of Heaven, the Abbess of the Diveevo monastery, built here, and after the construction of the warm cathedral in the name of the Most Holy Trinity, the right side chapel was consecrated in the name of the Tenderness icon, and the miraculous image was placed here. A virgin in soul and body, Father Seraphim achieved not only holiness of life, but also dispassion. During prayer, his mind, illuminated by the light of Christ's love, ascended to places of ineffable mysteries, Divine radiance, and future endless life. From strength to strength, the monk followed the path of spiritual ascent. The Most Holy Theotokos encouraged him to new and new exploits for the sake of spiritual perfection. He received from Her the gifts of clairvoyance and healing of physical and mental ailments. St. Seraphim left us an inexhaustible treasure of spiritual teachings, one of them is a conversation with H.A. Motovilov about the purpose of Christian life. In the nearby hermitage of the monk, on the banks of the Sarovka River, this “most wondrous, most amazing, truly supernatural instruction sounded - or more correctly and more accurately said: Divine revelation,” which Father Seraphim gave to his young friend and disciple: “Prayer, fasting, vigil and all sorts of other Christian deeds, no matter how good they are in themselves, however, the purpose of our Christian life is not in doing them alone, although they serve as necessary means to achieve it. The true goal of our Christian life is to acquire the Holy Spirit of God” 4. God crowns His saints with glory in different ways. According to the words of the apostle, “There is another glory to the sun, another glory to the moon, and another glory to the stars; star differs from star in glory” (1 Cor. 15:41). The Monk Seraphim acquired the glory of the sun, approaching in purity the Queen of Heaven and Earth, so that at the end of his life the Mother of God appeared to him with a host of saints and “spoke so graciously, as if to a loved one” 5 . The monk was not blinded by the radiance of the purest Virgin, but spoke to her as to her beloved Mother about the hour of his departure and about the Diveyevo virgins. For him, the border between earthly life and the angelic world had already been erased. He became an earthly angel and a heavenly man, worthy to see in reality the radiant face of “the most honorable cherub and the most glorious without comparison seraphim.” The holiness of the life of St. Seraphim left an indelible imprint on the minds and hearts of the Russian people. In Christianity, personal example is of great importance. Few can show with their own lives the path leading to God. The Monk Seraphim showed this road. To this day it remains a lamp that brings warmth and joy to people. Thousands of people flock daily to the multi-healing relics of the wondrous saint of God, resting in the Seraphim-Diveevsky Monastery. Since the first centuries of Christianity, the Church has venerated the holy relics of martyrs, saints, confessors who were awarded the right to enter the bright palaces of the Kingdom of Heaven, and speaks of the immortality of the human soul, of the eternal life of those who fulfilled the commandments of Christ. The prayers of these saints of God intensify after their death. And if the Monk Seraphim invariably helped people during his life, then after his death this help increased, truly: “When God called you from earthly labors to Heavenly rest, your love ceased from us, and it is impossible to count your miracles, multiplying like the stars of heaven: for all over the ends of our earth you appeared to the people of God and granted them healing.” And we pray to the saint for help: “Oh, immeasurable height of a pure soul, oh, bright mind, soaring beyond the boundaries of human nature, oh, worthy son of the Heavenly Fatherland, Rev. Father Seraphim, pray to God for us!” Baturova T.K. Venerable Seraphim of Sarov and Russian spirituality The year 2003 was rich in major dates that miraculously brought together religious and cultural phenomena: 1700 years since the repose of St. George the Victorious, the heavenly patron of Moscow and Orthodox soldiers, 700 years since the repose of the Holy Prince Daniel of Moscow, 220 years since the birth of St. Philaret, Metropolitan of Moscow, and, finally, 170 years from the day of repose and the 100th anniversary of the glorification of St. Seraphim of Sarov as a saint. And then there are literary dates: 300 years since the birth of V.K. Trediakovsky, 200 years since the birth of F.I. Tyutchev and N.M. Yazykova, 180 years since the birth of A.N. Ostrovsky. And this combination of round dates of religious and cultural life leads to certain thoughts and is not accidental, for, according to the teachers of the Church, “whoever believes in chance does not believe in God.” Yes, and Pushkin wrote: “There are strange rapprochements...”. In a critical, dangerous year marked by military events, misfortunes and catastrophes, this unification of religious and cultural principles may have been the spiritual thread that kept the world on the brink of the abyss. With all the abundance of major dates, the Seraphim dates especially stood out, and the year 2003 was, first of all, the year of St. Seraphim. The Russian Land gave the world many holy prayer books. This is a whole host of saints who “shone in the Russian land.” Hieromonk Roman wrote about them: Russia-Rus, no matter where you rush, Tattered, abused, wretched, - You won't die! You've already been saved Having so many righteous with God 6. Among Russian righteous people, St. Seraphim occupies a special place. This feature was best defined by Archpriest Valentin Sventsitsky, an ardent admirer of Fr. Seraphim: “The image of St. Seraphim is an image of the holiness of the Russian people. He is so close to us because we feel in him the best that is in the Russian people themselves. St. Seraphim is our national Russian saint. In no one saint of God is the spirit of our Orthodoxy so embodied as in the image of the wretched Seraphim. He is us ourselves, but raised from the mud, purified by heroism, enlightened by the grace of God. He is not only close to us, he is our dear” 7. Through the Monk Seraphim, this great man of prayer, who lived 200 years ago in the deep forests of Sarov, we can know and understand Russian spirituality, for it is not without reason that it is said: “If you want to know the people, look at them not when they are raging, but when they are praying” 8 . Many authoritative writers, thinkers, and theologians wrote and spoke about St. Seraphim: V.V. Rozanov, D.S. Merezhkovsky, E. Poselyanin, V.N. Ilyin, Rev. Sergius Bulgakov, Hieromonk Seraphim Rose, Archpriest. Georgy Florovsky, S.A. Nilus, I.S. Shmelev... At the same time, they all found the most sincere, deep, sincere words about the saint, since everyone felt him in their hearts, experienced the power of his prayers, had their own mystical meeting with Saint Seraphim. Talking and writing about St. Seraphim is not only joyful, but also difficult and even dangerous. V.N. warned about this danger. Ilyin, who noted: “The creative word, knowledge, command of destinies and their proclamation - all this makes it “scorching fire,” and one must approach it with fear and reverent love.” And again: “To know and learn to venerate the Sarov Wonderworker means to know and learn to venerate Orthodoxy, which has concentrated its strongest rays in him, as if in a focus” 9 . What is the main thing that determines the personality of St. Seraphim, what determines his influence on Russian spirituality? V.N. Ilyin wrote that the personality of any person is absolutely incomprehensible and accessible only to the Creator, and emphasized the special unknowability of St. Seraphim, who revealed the image of God in man. It was about the Venerable Seraphim that the Most Holy Theotokos, who appeared to him twelve times, said: “This one is from Our race.” It was the Monk Seraphim who acquired the grace of the Holy Spirit, so that the human face, according to the testimony of H.A. Motovilov, shone “in the middle of the sun in the dazzling brilliance of its midday rays” 10. It was the Monk Seraphim who sometimes rose “an arshin from the ground” during prayer. Such a person, who is called “an earthly angel and a heavenly man,” is especially incomprehensible and mysterious. And yet the main thing about him is hidden in the name: “Seraphim” - “fiery”, “fiery”. The Monk Seraphim burned with love for God and people. This ardor is the meaning of God’s appeal to man: “I want your heart and soul to always be on fire before My eyes and to overcome all cowardice in My name” 11 . This ardor is a prerequisite for the knowledge of God. The Monk Seraphim said: “God is fire, warming and igniting hearts and wombs” 12. Only a flaming soul can approach this fire. Flaming himself, the Monk Seraphim acted and continues to act on other people, igniting their souls. Prot. Sergius Bulgakov, who called the saint “the messenger of heaven,” pointed out: “Like the heavenly seraphim in the vision of the prophet Isaiah, who touched the human heart with tongs with coal from the heavenly altar, and this earthly Seraphim touches hearts, whether they will ignite from the heavenly coal” 13. This ardor had great origins. Religious writers have already pointed out the deep connection between St. Seraphim and the first holy fathers. So, V.V. Rozanov wrote about the saint: “<...> a man who revealed the amazing resurrection of those quiet and contemplative souls who lived in the deserts of Libya, Sinai, and Syria in the 2nd, 3rd, 4th centuries AD. Not a single saint of the Russian Land has ever repeated in this way, but without intention, unintentionally, the great figures on which, in fact, like a bridge on its stilts, Christianity was established” 14. The Lord himself miraculously noted this connection: the day of remembrance of St. Seraphim is January 2 (15), and the day before, January 1 (14), is the day of memory of St. Basil the Great, the great Christian teacher who set out in his writings the true teaching about God, who gave the Church many rules and regulations, who composed the rite of the Divine Liturgy and several prayers. Basil the Great's closest friend was Saint Gregory the Theologian, another bright lamp of the Christian faith. Next to them is John Chrysostom. They brought to the world an ardor of spirit and faith, which was even visibly revealed, as the Church Tradition speaks of. Thus, during the baptism of Saint Basil the Great in the Jordan, “a fiery lightning suddenly flashed, and a dove emerging from that lightning plunged into the Jordan and, stirring up the water, flew away to heaven” 15. The second time the fervor of Basil the Great was revealed to Ephraim the Syrian, who lived in the desert, who prayed to God to show him the meaning of this saint. “And then one day, being in a state of spiritual delight, he saw a pillar of fire, the head of which reached to heaven, and heard a voice saying: - Ephraim, Ephraim! The way you see this pillar of fire, that’s how Vasily is” 16. This ardor of spirit was inherited by the Monk Seraphim. By virtue of his gift, he is a defining figure in the spiritual life of Russia, of course, of Pushkin’s time, but not only: all subsequent eras invariably experienced the beneficial influence of the priest. When the senile ministry of St. Seraphim began in 1825 (it was short-lived - only 8 years, and preparation for it lasted 46 years: 16 years of monasticism, 15 years of hermitage, 15 years of seclusion), thousands of people began to flock to the wonderful old man every day, and the abbot of the Sarov Monastery, Fr. Niphon complained: “I won’t be able to close the monastery gates until midnight” 17. Neither fortune, nor academic merits, nor secular connections had any meaning here: a person was determined only by his heart. And this corresponded to the divine call: “Give Me, son, your heart” (Proverbs 23:26). And the elder’s joyful Easter greeting was addressed to everyone at any time of the year: “Christ is risen, my joy!” And this was the main lesson of Father Seraphim. If the world, which, according to the saint, “lies in evil” and “is the realm of another, that is, the prince of darkness,” taught enmity, then Father Seraphim expressed the heavenly truth: he brought love and joy to people. Joy is the main feature of the spiritual appearance of St. Seraphim, who was a great teacher of joy. He was glowing with joy. It was heavenly joy, “the joy of the Lord.” That is why the monk called his favorite icon of the Queen of Heaven “Tenderness” “Joy of All Joys.” This joy illuminated many of the saint’s contemporaries and descendants. Among them are A.S. Pushkin. In science, a tradition has developed to place the figures of St. Seraphim and Pushkin on opposite sides. This was also done by H.A. Berdyaev, who put genius above holiness. According to the philosopher, Fr. Seraphim and Pushkin “lived in different worlds, did not know each other, never came into contact with anything,” since “the greatness of holiness and the greatness of genius are incomparable, incommensurable, as if they belong to different beings.” H.A. Berdyaev saw in Pushkin’s genius “a different holiness” - “the holiness of boldness, and not the holiness of obedience,” and believed that it was “more sacrificial than ascetic and canonical holiness,” since it is aimed not at internal, spiritual work, but at accomplishing great deeds in the world and can destroy the author. H.A. Berdyaev made a somewhat daring assumption: “Perhaps pious obedience is not always pleasing to God. In the dark depths of life, rebellious and God-fighting blood remains forever and a free creative source flows” 18. Godlessness and creative freedom are put on the same page. But the study of romanticism convinces us of the opposite: Russian romanticism as a literary phenomenon had deep Orthodox roots, existed and developed within the Orthodox spiritual culture. Researchers rarely talk about the connections between Orthodoxy and Romanticism; as a result, there is an impassable line between these phenomena. Indeed, these phenomena are of different levels, but the main thing in them is spiritual fulfillment. Romanticism is a constant companion of the human soul, reflecting its natural state. In many poetic works, the ideal world of romanticism with its apotheosis of the spirit, combined with primordial Orthodox values, dominates. V.H. wrote about this. Kasatkina and her students. In one of the latest works of this researcher, the task of understanding the Orthodox nature of romanticism is set, its essential features are revealed, expressed in the activities of leading creative individuals, primarily V.A. Zhukovsky, A.S. Pushkina, M.Yu. Lermontova, N.V. Gogol, traces how the Orthodox views and feelings of writers of the first half of the 19th century are realized in Russian romantic literature, which were later included in realistic art 19. Modern researchers say little about the relationship between the two geniuses of the Russian spirit - St. Seraphim and Pushkin. Sometimes, barely touching on the problem, they express regret that these two people did not meet in life, that Pushkin, living in Boldin in the fall of 1830 and being so close to Sarov, did not visit the reverend elder, and believe that otherwise the poet’s life would have turned out differently (M.M. Dunaev). This established idea was to some extent shaken by the researcher of the Orthodox world in Pushkin’s drawings L.A. Craval. In the image of the monk on the pages of the manuscript of Pushkin’s poem “The Desert Fathers and the Immaculate Wives...” she discovered obvious features of the appearance of St. Seraphim and suggested that the meeting did take place and that Pushkin received the blessing of the elder, memories of which the poet hid deep in his heart 20 . And yet, a personal meeting is not always the defining moment. There is a deep and hidden meaning in the fact that Pushkin was a contemporary of the reverend. Providence almost simultaneously sent these two great people into the world: if one became an expression of the creative spirit of the Russian people, then the other, in the words of Patriarch Alexy II, “that spiritual flame with which Russia warmed itself” 21 . The contemporaries of St. Seraphim of Sarov and Pushkin - thinkers of the 1830s - also approached the problem of the relationship between genius and holiness and solved it, albeit in general terms, but very subtly. M.A. Dmitriev in the article “The Spirit of the Time and the Need of the Age for Their Philosophical and Moral Significance”, published in “Telescope” by N.I. Nadezhdin, reflected on the all-determining spirit of the time and noted its effect on the literary, philosophical, scientific life of society: responding to internal needs, “suddenly this kind of literature spreads; suddenly, like an electric spark, such and such ideas of philosophy run through; or at the same time two geniuses, living in different countries and not communicating with each other, are working on the same truth or making discoveries that explain one another! 22. The objective “universal force,” called by Dmitriev the “spirit of the time,” was realized in the appearance of St. Seraphim and Pushkin. They were these two geniuses, living in different places, not communicating with each other, but affirming, each in their own way, spiritual truths. It is known that Pushkin extremely valued religious feeling, sincere faith, originally inherent in the Russian people. He believed that without religion, the cultural development of a nation, the birth of art, literature, philosophy, and morality are impossible. What unites and brings these two personalities together at the highest level? We call Pushkin a bright genius. Despite all the difficulties and hardships of Pushkin’s life, a joyful feeling covers us when we come into contact with his work. This feeling deeply brings together the figures of St. Seraphim and Pushkin. That is why a person experiences a particularly reverent, joyful feeling when visiting Sarov, Diveevo and when visiting Pushkin’s places - Mikhailovsky, Boldin. The Orthodox soul feels a special inner kinship with St. Seraphim and Pushkin. Two Russian geniuses, even without mutual influence, each in their own way, expressed the highest moments in the development of the human spirit, and already in this one can see the deep connection between Orthodoxy and literature. The divine fullness of Russian poetry, especially romantic poetry, was not taken into account for a long time. But “Telescope” also contained reflections on the poetry of Pushkin’s time in its best manifestations; its creations were considered transparent and it was noted: “we do not so much look at them as through them, as through an open window; We try to examine the very inside of the new church and the deity in it that illuminates it” 23. We see this reflection of divine light in the works of Russian classics. The question of the relationship between Orthodoxy and art, especially poetry, worried Pushkin’s contemporaries also in theoretical terms. Thus, in “Telescope” an intimate confession was made about the essence of poetic art: “Yes! art, poetry, in the highest and most extensive signification, is the last plank remaining to us after the shipwreck of all dreams, all hopes, on which, if one cannot be saved, then one can perish on the surface of the waves, with one’s eyes turned to the sky. <...> In the light of religious animation, death and decay come to life: the dawn of faith dawns on the tombs; the death's head smiles with hope. And then the lofty poetry of Christianity is born, sowing into corruption and rising into incorruption. So, art, poetry is the last earthly bliss, the last faith, the last hope, the last love, the last earthly religion of the soul! 24. And the root of this religion, as noted in the Telescope, lies in the human soul. Pushkin's heart was ignited with seraphic fire and became the heart of a poet-prophet. The desire “towards the heights of Zion”, to the transcendental monastery, entered the consciousness and work of the poet, although not immediately and difficultly. Heavenly, Easter joy was familiar to F.I. Tyutchev, who greeted the great “coming day, / Ecumenical and Orthodox day”: Day of the Orthodox East, Hallowed, holy, great day, Spread your gospel widely But Holy Russia is the limit Let it be heard in the world at large, Let it overflow 25. And in the works of N.M. Yazykov’s unexplored motive of holiness is associated with St. Seraphim. The poet's younger sister, Ekaterina Mikhailovna, was H.A.'s first and long love. Motovilov, a Simbirsk landowner, “servant of the Mother of God and Seraphim,” to whom the monk revealed the purpose of Christian life and honored him with the blessing of being a witness to his miracles. She was not particularly beautiful, but she captivated with her silence of spirit and the purity of her inner world. After the death of her father, Ekaterina Mikhailovna lived on the family estate with her sick mother, and this life was almost monastic - quiet and sacrificial. Motovilov told Reverend Seraphim about his love and asked for blessings for matchmaking, but did not receive it. The Monk Seraphim, who had the gift of providence, appreciated the moral qualities of Ekaterina Mikhailovna, but told his young friend that this was not his destiny, that his future chosen one was still only eight years old and she lived in a local monastery. The shocked Motovilov for the first time disobeyed his spiritual mentor, wooed Ekaterina Mikhailovna and was refused. After some time, E.M. Yazykova became the wife and guardian angel of another person of high spirituality - A.S. Khomyakov, and he dedicated his brightest poems to her. And Motovilov subsequently actually married a quiet and meek pupil of the Seraphim-Diveevsky Monastery 26. Yazykov has a wonderful poem “Prayer” (1835), dedicated to his sister. In it, the poet’s prayer is sanctified by heavenly, seraphim radiance: Let the deep sleep last And the night is deaf around me! Let me still forget myself, Let me taste the joy again Close to Khomyakov and I.V. Yazykov. Kireyevsky also experienced the influence of St. Seraphim. The saint changed his life and filled it with Christian light. I.V.'s wife Kireevsky as a child went with her mother to the elder in Sarov, and her entire future life was warmed by the blessing of the monk, which subsequently influenced the establishment of the religious views of I.V. Kireevsky, turned him from a European-oriented philosopher into a deeply Orthodox person. The influence and ministry of the saint do not cease with the end of his earthly existence, but continue and intensify after his death. The saint surprisingly convinces us of the absence of death. Before his death, Father Seraphim punished his “orphans” Diveyevo novices: “When I’m gone, you go to my grave! As you feel the time, you go - and the more often, the better. Everything that is in your soul, no matter what happens to you, come to me, and bring all your grief with you to my grave! Falling to the ground as if alive, tell everything, and I will hear you, all your sorrow will fly away and pass! As you always said to the living, so it is here! For you I am alive and will be forever!” 28. These words are addressed not only to the Diveyevo nuns, but also to each of us: from the distant 19th century, St. Seraphim blesses and comforts everyone who asks and is weak. The religious writer E. Poselyanin subtly noticed this consoling influence of the monk on modern man: “the longer you think about him, the brighter and purer your soul becomes. Everything, everything unclean, sad, dark is washed away from your soul when Seraphim shines on you. And to all the evil in the world, to all your grief, you can exclaim: “And Seraphim?” 29. Zelenina Ya.E. The image of St. Seraphim of Sarov in a lithograph of the Seraphim-Diveevsky Monastery St. Seraphim of Sarov is one of the few saints who have large pre-canonization iconography in various forms of art (painting, engraving, lithography, wood carving, enamel). A significant part of his portrait images are in one way or another connected in origin with the Sarov, Diveyevo and Ponetaevsk monasteries. The lifetime portraits by S. Serebryakov and D. Evstafiev, known from the life descriptions of the elder, were kept in the Sarov Hermitage and served as models for numerous repetitions until the end of the 19th century 30 . At the beginning of the 20th century, the first of them served as the basis for the most widespread iconographic version, where the saint is represented in a cassock and white stole, with his right hand pressed to his chest 31 . Apparently, during the life of the monk, portraits of him appeared in a hood with a half-robe, on the way to the hermitage, with a knotted stick in his hand (full-length, knee-length, shoulder-length) 32 . This is exactly how his appearance is captured in the first engraving, executed in 1839 by L. Afanasyev for the biography of the Sarov hermit, schemamonk Mark 33. Certainly early, although, at the direction of L.I. Denisov, and created after the death of the elder, is his life-size image in a white robe and dark skufya, with a raised blessing hand 34. One of these portraits, small in size, was returned to the Seraphim-Diveevo Monastery along with the personal belongings of the monk, which indicates a special veneration of the image as a lifetime 35. Accurate lists of the portrait of 1831, kept in Kazan in the Krupenikov family 36, are also known. Despite the numerous picturesque images of the Sarov elder, his iconography, especially the early one, remains an unstudied and even mysterious area of ​​Russian church culture. Which of the portraits were the most revered in Sarov and Diveyevo, and, therefore, the earliest, can be partially clarified thanks to the circulation of artistic works - engravings and lithographs, as a rule, published by order of the Seraphim monasteries or admirers of the elder’s memory. Many of them were intended as book illustrations for his biographies, but there were also separate sheets of a clearly portrait nature. In addition, it was in lithography that a large number of plot images of the saint’s life became widespread. This side of the artistic chronicle of two famous monasteries in Russia has not yet been the subject of special research. Meanwhile, the diversity of genres, the vast geography of the production of prints (Moscow, St. Petersburg, Diveevo, Mstera), and the even wider area of ​​their distribution make it possible to significantly supplement the history of the origin and development of the iconography of St. Seraphim of Sarov. Significant groups of prints have been preserved mainly in the collections of the Russian National Library and the Russian State Library (came from the Rumyantsev Museum), where they were received as a legal deposit back in the 19th century 37 . So, already in the first decade after the death of St. Seraphim, several lithographs were created: “Hieromonk of the Sarov Desert, Father Seraphim”, 1840, by the Moscow workshop of M. Shchurov (Russian State Library, Moscow - hereinafter referred to as RSL), “Father Seraphim, Hieromonk of the Sarov Desert and Desert Dweller”, 1843, by the workshop of A. Chishkov - published “by the support of one of those who are zealous for this Elder” (RSL), “Father Seraphim, Hieromonk and Hermit of the Sarov Monastery” in 1843 (Central State Historical Archive of Moscow and the Moscow Region, Moscow - hereinafter TsGIAM). The first large-format sheet (like the 1839 engraving) represents the elder walking into the hermitage, the second goes back, of course, to an unknown early image of the saint, differing from the 1831 portrait by the presence of an epitrachelion, and from the 1863 lithograph from the portrait of D. Evstafiev (reproduced in the edition of N.V. Elagin 38) - by a different rotation of the figure and bowing the head. Early lithographs are distinguished by both the accuracy and thoroughness of conveying portrait characteristics, and the high professionalism of artistic execution. These qualities are preserved in the 1856 print, printed in Shamin’s lithography in Moscow (State Historical Museum, Moscow - hereinafter GIM); Russian National Library, St. Petersburg - hereinafter referred to as RNL), with an image under the portrait of the tomb of an elder. The facial features, lowered gaze and gesture of the hand with a rosary are very close to the early portrait of St. Seraphim in a green stole (Trinity Seraphim-Diveevo Monastery, Diveevo - hereinafter TSDM) 39, with a different, “mirror” rotation of the figure (which is understandable, given the technique of lithographic translation). All these images were a kind of reference point for works of the second half of the 19th century, usually of smaller format and detail. Apparently, they existed at the beginning of the 20th century, as can be seen from the exact coincidence of the design in the lithograph by A. Chishkov and on the icon from a private collection. The need to create a large number of images of the Sarov elder, associated with his increasing veneration in all layers of Russian society, obviously served as an incentive for organizing his own lithographic workshop in the Seraphim-Diveevsky Monastery. Among the various prints with the image of St. Seraphim of Sarov from the second half of the 19th - early 20th centuries, this is one of the most significant complexes of works. In the Sarov Desert, despite its artistic traditions, the proximity of the Arzamas school, headed by A.B. Stupin, engravings and lithographs were ordered in the capital (engraving by A.G. Ukhtomsky based on the original by F. Shmelev in 1834, published “with the diligence of Hegumen Nifont”, RSL), and only one sheet was engraved according to the drawing of Hieromonk Hilarion (first third of the 19th century, State Historical Museum). A large series of external and internal views of the monastery, cathedrals, portraits of abbots, as well as a view of the monastery in 1764 were created in the Moscow workshop of I. Shelkovnikov in the 1850s (RSL, State Historical Museum). At the same time, in 1858, a portrait of the Sarov ascetic Schemamonk Mark was printed in a lithograph by Paul Petit in St. Petersburg (Nizhny Novgorod State Art Museum, Nizhny Novgorod - hereinafter NGHM). Lithographs with the image of St. Seraphim and the mark “published by the property of the Sarov Hermitage” appeared a decade later (“Reverend Seraphim in a nearby hermitage”, 1869, by the workshop of A.B. Morozov (NGHM), “Reverend Seraphim praying on a stone”, 1882, by the workshop of A.P. Zelenkov (RNB) and others). This is almost the end of the Sarov tradition. The Diveyevo lithography was formed “according to the thoughts of His Eminence Ioannikiy” (Rudnev), 40 who occupied the Nizhny Novgorod department in 1873–1877. The first prints, dating from 1875–1876, impress with their high professional level. The earliest surviving sheets were made using the more labor-intensive technique of tone lithography. Obviously, it is no coincidence that the series opens with a portrait of the founder of the community, Mother Alexandra (Melgunova) from 1875 (RNB) - a translation into lithography of her lifetime pictorial image that was in the monastery. It is interesting that, in addition to the traditional Diveyevo theme, at this time several images of the icons of Jesus Christ and the Mother of God revered in the monastery appeared. Among them are quite rare iconographic versions, such as “The Parable of the Sower” or “Take, eat, this is My Body...” (RNB). Of course, this choice was influenced by academic artistic traditions on Diveyevo’s creativity. As is known, in the 1850s, several sisters of the Diveyevo community studied the art of icon painting and mosaics in St. Petersburg, directly under the patronage of the President of the Academy of Arts, Grand Duchess Maria Nikolaevna 41 . After the monastic “turmoil,” in the early 1860s, all the students moved to the Seraphim-Ponetaevsky Monastery, where expensive mosaic and enamel techniques were developed. No information has been found about the existence of printing workshops in Ponetaevka. Diveyevo lithography is a large and independent phenomenon, one of the leading art workshops in the Nizhny Novgorod province. It remains unclear with whose help this production was organized and who trained the sisters. Many of the monastic works, mainly from the 1870s, have author’s signatures in the image field: Tatiana Perova, Anna Savelyeva, Evgenia Lapina, Evdokia Petrova, Praskovya Zemenkova, Anna Zakharova, which is generally not typical for monastic creativity (already in the 1880s this tradition was disappearing). Due to their youth, the sisters who worked in lithography could not see St. Seraphim, and not one of them studied in St. Petersburg 42 . Nevertheless, the works of the novices in composition, drawing and light and shadow modeling are not inferior to the works of the workshops in Moscow and St. Petersburg. The sisters translated into lithography the lifetime and earliest portraits of the saint. The print by P. Zemenkova “View of Elder Seraphim in the last years of his life” of 1876 (RSL, RNL) in all details of the image coincides with the lithograph by N. Breze of 1863, placed in the biography of N.V. Elagin 43, as well as with a picturesque portrait of the second third of the 19th century (the skete of St. Sergius of Radonezh, Moscow St. Daniel's Monastery). Probably, the works repeat the unsurvived lifetime portrait of St. Seraphim by the artist D. Evstafiev 44 . However, in this group of images the old man’s face does not have such recognizable portrait features. One example of the rather bold iconographic creativity of Diveyevo artists is the image of “The Venerable Elder Seraphim - Founder of the Diveyevo Monastery” of 1888 (RSL), where the elder is presented full-length, with a blessing right hand and a model of the Trinity Cathedral in his hand. This lithograph was created on the model of the icon, and although the saint is still presented without a halo, in the inscription he is called “Reverend” (the print was approved for printing by the Moscow Spiritual Censorship Committee). The border separating portrait and icon images is practically absent for admirers of St. Seraphim. Long before the glorification of the elder in the Seraphim-Diveevo Monastery, his portraits were carried at religious processions 45. Mainly thanks to lithography, which is largely associated with book illustration, a significant number of subjects from the life of St. Seraphim were developed and disseminated. The first subject engravings and lithographs appeared in the late 1840s - 1850s: “The Hermits of the Sarov Monastery Schemamonk Mark and the Monk Seraphim” 1848 (RGB), “Reverend Seraphim of Sarov Praying on a Stone” 1851 (RNL), a series of lithographs from 1856 by the workshop of P.N. Sharapov (RSL), similar in composition and design to the watercolor illustrations of 1849 in the tray copy of the Empress “Tales” by Hieromonk Joasaph (Tolstosheyev) 46 (RSL). In addition to the main ones (“Reverend Seraphim on the way to the hermitage”, “Prayer of the monk on the stone”, “Reverend Seraphim feeding the bear”, “Death of the elder Seraphim”), rarer subjects appear that are practically not found in the painting of the second half of the 19th century (“The Blessing of a Pilgrim in a Nearby Hermitage” is one of the first compositions to appear, “The Blessing of the Source”, “Reverend Seraphim Walking to the church"). Unfortunately, not all plot engravings provide an accurate portrait description of the elder’s face. The sisters worked on both individual sheets and series of illustrations. A preparatory drawing for the lithograph of 1878 “The Appearance of the Mother of God to the novice Prokhor during his illness” (a copy of the print by N. Breze of 1863 or an exact educational repetition of the indicated Diveyevo prints), originating from the Seraphim-Ponetaevsky Monastery (NGHM), or an exact educational repetition of the print, has been preserved. It is unclear how this sample could have gotten into the Ponetaev collection, but it is possible that some of the drawings from the last third of the 19th century (NGHM), which did not have printed analogues, were also intended for translation into lithography. In addition to images of St. Seraphim of various iconographic versions, there are lithographs with a portrait of Blessed Pelagia Ivanovna and her image on her deathbed in 1885 (Russian State Historical Archive, St. Petersburg - hereinafter RGIA). The prints were made from painted portraits and were approved by the censor a year after the death of the old woman. A significant group consists of architectural landscapes: views of the Sarov and Diveyevo monasteries, the Trinity Cathedral and its iconostasis (RSL, RNL). Of course, these lithographs were created on the basis of full-scale landscape sketches. It is interesting that the sheet with a view of the Sarov Monastery (RSL) created in 1876 by T. Perova has a color version of 1880 (GIM). The works of the Diveyevo workshop are easily recognizable by certain figurative and stylistic techniques (for example, “scratching” a drawing of plants). The origins of the Diveyevo style, obviously, should be sought in the work of artists of the Arzamas school and the first attempts to depict Elder Seraphim by Moscow and St. Petersburg lithographers (A. Chishkov, M. Shchurov, I. Korelin, A. Morozov). Simultaneously with traditional lithography, samples of color printing appeared, mainly on fabric, with an unusual monochrome coloring, in which brown color predominates. The earliest example is a copy of the icon of the Mother of God “Tenderness” (“Joy of All Joys”) from 1877 with a dedicatory inscription to Abbess Maria (Ushakova) on the back: “Blessing of Abbess Maria Nun Ruffina with her sisters. Seraphim-Diveevsky Monastery of the 1877th year of the month of the day" 47 (TSDM). The cell image of St. Seraphim is depicted here in its original setting, executed in the style of the “second Baroque”. As in the pictorial copies of the icon from the late 19th – early 20th centuries, which reproduce another, later frame, all the details of its decoration are conveyed as accurately as possible in pictorial language. In this case, a primed canvas with a printed image is stretched on a stretcher and is perceived as a pictorial image. Apparently, such chromolithographs were originally intended as icons. With a large number of pictorial copies, the icon of the Mother of God “Tenderness”, for example, does not have black and white repetitions (with the exception of the sheet of 1867, which came out of the lithograph of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, RSL). There is a relatively large, religious-sized image of the saint printed on canvas in a nearby hermitage, near a source (Church and Archaeological Office of the Moscow Theological Academy, Sergiev Posad - hereinafter TsAK MDA). The bent figure of the old man is depicted so boldly and unusually, in profile, in rapid movement, that the thought arises of an early pictorial original chromolithograph. The model for the print on fabric with the half-length image of St. Seraphim in the stole, with his right hand raised to his chest (RNB) was the lifetime portrait of the monk Joseph (Serebryakov). The chromolithograph with the figure of the saint in a white robe and skufya standing on a plank floor (RNB), and the lithograph of 1879 (RSL) repeat the above-mentioned early portrait (1840s?) from the Seraphim-Diveyevo Monastery, returned along with the elder’s belongings 48, which further confirms its significance in the iconography of the elder. A small print with the figure of an old man on the way to the hermitage, on a blue background (RNB), in all details - right down to the image of grass and a stump in the foreground - corresponds to the pictorial image of the last quarter of the 19th century (TSDM) and a number of icons created after the canonization of the saint and consecrated on his relics (Central Museum of Ancient Russian Culture and Art named after St. Andrei Rublev, Moscow; TSDM). In some cases, the color version literally reproduces the black and white one (lithograph “The Righteous Death of St. Seraphim” by E. Lapina in 1876 and chromolithography on fabric, NLR). The introduction of color printing technology already at the end of the 1870s indicates a high, almost metropolitan level of the workshop. Unfortunately, many chromolithographs, especially on fabric, do not have signatures with imprint information; apparently, they all appeared in the last quarter of the 19th century. It is not entirely clear what technology the sisters used to listen to the “translated icons.” A photograph of this workshop was preserved in an early 19th century album (TSDM). In the story about the visit of the monastery by Bishop Modest (Strelbitsky) of Nizhny Novgorod in 1886, it is mentioned as a “metachromotype”: “Here, in the presence of His Eminence, the image of the Mother of God, painted with paints, was transferred from paper to the deck... The Bishop carefully examined the metachromotypic works and was very pleased with them, and wished that the saints of the artist Solntsev, worked metachromotypically in the monastery, spread throughout the churches as much as possible" 49 . Probably as a result of this artistic production, a small image of “The Death of Elder Seraphim” from the last quarter of the 19th century (private collection), printed on a primed board, was obtained. The elder is presented without a halo, but the material and artistic structure of the monument are extremely close to the icon. His monastic pedigree is confirmed by a similar chromolithograph of the same time (RNB). If in 1887 in the monastery ten sisters were engaged in lithography and four actually drawing on stone and printing 50, then at the beginning of the 20th century their number increased to eighty, and each stone was prepared within a year 51. At this time, mainly tone and chromolithography developed, as well as the technique of color printing on a primed board, followed by writing with paints. Despite the great influence of the style of chromolithographs by E.I. Fesenko, M.T. Solovyov, etc., Diveyevo’s works of this time are also distinguished by their subtle harmonious color (“Celebrations on the occasion of the discovery and transfer of the holy relics of St. Seraphim of Sarov” 1903, TSDM). The plot of the workshop's works is expanding more and more. Created in 1903, the chromolithograph of the Seven-Shot Icon of the Mother of God is a reproduction of one of the revered images of the monastery (TSDM). It is likely that the workshop existed even in the 1920s, which is indirectly confirmed by the remark of Archpriest Stefan Lyashevsky 52 and the original lithographic stones (TSDM) that survived the closure of the monastery. One of them presents a rare plot, “The Works of the Holy Family,” which received a unique response in the post-revolutionary era, when many monasteries turned into labor cooperatives. In the history of monastic art workshops, lithography from the Seraphim-Diveevo monastery is one of the significant phenomena both in terms of the variety and selection of subjects, and the high skill of their execution. List of lithographs made in the workshop of the Seraphim-Diveevsky Monastery 53 1. Venerable Alexandra (Melgunova). 1875. Tone lithograph. 2. View of St. Seraphim of Sarov in the last years of his life. 1875. E. Lapina. Tint lithography. 3. View of the Sarov Desert from the north. 1876. T. Perova. Lithography. 4. Parable of the Sower. 1876. T. Perova. Lithography. 5. Icon of the Mother of God “It is Worthy to Eat.” 1876. T. Perova. Lithography. 6. "The Passion of the Lord Jesus Christ." 1876. T. Perova. Lithography. 7. “Take, eat, this is My Body...” 1876. E. Lapina. Lithography. 8. Guardian Angel. 1876. A. Zakharova. Lithography. 9 . View of the Seraphim-Diveevo Monastery from the southwest side. 1876. A. Savelyeva. Tint lithography. 10. Kazan Icon of the Mother of God (copy of the miraculous icon of the Vyshinsk Hermitage). 1876. Lithograph. 11. View of the elder, Father Seraphim, in the last years of his life. 1876. P. Zemenkova. Lithography. 12. Venerable Seraphim of Sarov, working in the forest. 1876. A. Savelyeva. Lithography. 13. Series of images: Venerable Seraphim of Sarov; View of St. Seraphim in the last years of his life; The righteous death of St. Seraphim of Sarov (2 images). 1876. E. Lapina. Lithography. 14. The righteous death of St. Seraphim of Sarov. 1876. E. Lapina. Tint lithography. 15. The appearance of the Mother of God to the Monk Seraphim, who was still a novice, during his illness. 1878. Lithograph. 16. Appearance of the Mother of God to St. Seraphim on the day of the Annunciation. 1878. Lithograph. 17. Venerable Seraphim of Sarov feeding a bear. 1878. Lithograph. 18. Venerable Seraphim of Sarov. 1879. Lithograph. 19. Venerable Seraphim of Sarov feeding a bear. 1879. E. Petrova. Lithography. 20. Series of images: Venerable Seraphim of Sarov; Venerable Seraphim blessing the spring; Venerable Seraphim feeding a bear; Venerable Seraphim praying on a stone. 1870s. E. Petrova. Lithography. 21. Venerable Seraphim of Sarov praying on a stone. 1880. E. Petrova. Lithography. 22. Venerable Seraphim of Sarov going to the church. 1880. Lithograph. 23. View of the Sarov Desert from the north. 1880. T. Perova. Tint lithography. 24. Venerable Seraphim of Sarov during his labors. 1880. Lithograph. 25. The righteous death of St. Seraphim of Sarov. 1880. Lithograph. 26. Venerable Seraphim of Sarov on the way to the desert. 1881. Lithograph. 27. Vision of St. Seraphim in the church. 1883. Lithograph. 28. Interior view of the Trinity Cathedral of the Seraphim-Diveevsky Monastery. 1885. Lithograph. 29. Holy Trinity Cathedral of the Seraphim-Diveev Monastery. 1885. Lithograph. 30. Venerable Seraphim is the founder of the Diveyevo monastery. 1888. Lithograph. 31. Blazh. Pelagia Ivanovna in a coffin. Blazh. Pelagia Ivanovna. 1885. Lithograph. 32. Icon of the Mother of God “Tenderness” (“Joy of All Joys”). 1877. Chromolithography on fabric. 33. Venerable Seraphim of Sarov in the nearby hermitage. Last quarter of the 19th century. Chromolithography on fabric. 34. Venerable Seraphim of Sarov. Last quarter of the 19th century. Chromolithography on fabric. 35. The righteous death of St. Seraphim of Sarov. Last quarter of the 19th century. Chromolithography on fabric. 36. Venerable Seraphim of Sarov praying on a stone. Last quarter of the 19th century. Chromolithograph. 37. Venerable Seraphim of Sarov on the way to the desert. Last quarter of the 19th century. Chromolithograph. 38. Venerable Seraphim of Sarov feeding a bear. Last quarter of the 19th century. Chromolithograph. 39. Martyrs Sophia, Faith, Hope, Love. 1896. Chromolithography. 40. Venerable Seraphim of Sarov. Last quarter of the 19th century. Chromolithograph. 41. Death of St. Seraphim of Sarov. Last quarter of the 19th century. Chromolithograph. 42. View of the Sarov Desert from the northwestern side. 1902. Lithograph. 43. View of the Seraphim-Diveevo Monastery from the southwest side. 1903. Tone lithograph. 44. Celebrations on the occasion of the opening and transfer of the holy relics of St. Seraphim of Sarov. Procession around the monastery churches on July 19, 1903. 1903. Chromolithography. 45. Death of St. Seraphim of Sarov. 1903. Chromolithography. 46. Appearance of the Mother of God to St. Seraphim of Sarov during illness. 1903. Chromolithography. 47. Vision of St. Seraphim of Christ the Savior during the liturgy. 1903. Chromolithography. 48. Appearance of the Mother of God to St. Seraphim of Sarov on the day of the Annunciation. 1903. Chromolithography. 49. Icon of the Mother of God “Seven Arrows”. 1903. Chromolithography. 50. View of the Seraphim-Diveevo Monastery (from the southwestern side). 1904. Chromolithography. 51. View of the Sarov Desert from the northwestern side. 1904. Chromolithography. 52. Blessed Pasha of Sarov. 1906. Chromolithography. 53. Righteous Anna with the Child Theotokos. 1911. Chromolithography. 54. Angel of prayer. 1912. Chromolithography. 55. Guardian Angel. 1912. Chromolithography. 56. Prophetess Anna. 1912. Chromolithography. Ryabiy M.M. Who recorded “The Conversation of Father Seraphim”? When in the era of Peter I there was a change in the writer's type and the writer began to turn into a private person, it was then that the ban on “carnal” manifestations in the press was lifted. From the time of Peter it was already a stone's throw to the moment when, in the second half of the 18th century, in a number of scientific and artistic works close to Masonic circles, they diligently tried to replace the role of the Orthodox Church with the “inner church,” thus destroying the ideological unity of the nation, statehood and Orthodoxy. The end of the eighteenth century brought not only the French revolution, which unleashed European wars, into which Russia was drawn in at the beginning of the new century, but also the anti-Christian ideas of the Marquis de Sade, and finally, another attempt at Russian rebellion. Who knows how the further development of Russian literature would have developed if it had not been for the ascetic works of the Russian Church, such representatives as St. Seraphim of Sarov. St. Seraphim represented a special national type of heroism, characteristic only of Russia - popular, accessible holiness, imbued with love for people. Already during his lifetime, the Sarov miracle worker began to personify a national image in which God’s plan for man was most fully manifested for believers. The name of the elder was widely known to both the common people and the aristocracy. There is a lot of evidence of this. Even during the life of St. Seraphim, portraits of him were painted - in a mantle and epitrachelion, with his arms crossed on his chest, with a rosary; with his right hand pressed to the stole and a rosary in his left. Other images of the elder were also made: in a mantle and hood, with a blessing right hand, with a staff... The icon sample of the 1830s, with indications for artists of the color of hair, clothes and background, is close in iconography to the portrait of 1831, kept in Kazan. Based on early portraits, engravings and lithographs were created in the late 1830s and early 1840s... The image of St. Seraphim of Sarov is valuable primarily because it is in it that the main postulate of Christianity is clearly demonstrated: man was created in the image and likeness of God. It's no secret that a legendary figure gives rise to stories and myths. And, indeed, it is difficult to convey with exact accuracy everything that the spirit-bearing elder taught his flock: after all, more than one hundred and seventy years have passed since his death. The first short biography of the Sarov ascetic was published in 1841, the first detailed life - in 1863. Among the books dedicated to the priest, we can particularly highlight such as “The Chronicle of the Seraphim-Diveyevo Monastery” by Metropolitan Seraphim (Chichagov), “The World Lamp” by Metropolitan Veniamin (Fedchenkov), “The Great in the Small” by S.A. Nilus, as well as carefully collected memories of his contemporaries. But can we guarantee that all the teachings and prophecies did not undergo a certain creative interpretation on the part of contemporaries-memoirists, which is quite understandable, taking into account the time and subjective factors? This is why it is important to have a first-person document - evidence of a recorded conversation with St. Seraphim. And there is such a document! In the Russian State Archives of Literature and Art (RGALI), in the Annenkov Fund, in file number 330, there is a small piece of paper, yellowed with age, on which is carefully written in an unknown female hand: “November 30th. Sarov. Conversation of Father Seraphim. The ink has long faded, the once snow-white sheet of paper has faded, but the words and phrases that can be read further, on the contrary, do not fade today, and perhaps are even more important than 170-180 years ago... The first part of the title "November 30th" could mean either November 1830 or simply the thirtieth day of November. (The elder left the seclusion on November 25, 1825, began talking with visitors five years before his release, after the seclusion he lived in a nearby hermitage, and from the second half of 1831 he finally moved to a monastery, resting at the very beginning of 1833) 54. The handwriting is noteworthy: one gets the impression that it was written by an elderly person, since this is exactly the kind of calligraphy found among those who were taught to read and write back in the 18th century. From the content of what was written, it is clear that the recording was made by a woman who told the elder about her maternal concerns. A very brief summary of the conversation, most likely in a hurry, without observing the rules of punctuation and spelling, was transferred to paper immediately after the meeting with Father Seraphim. The entries have the title: “Conversation of Father Seraphim.” The sheet, in landscape format, was once folded in four. That's all that can be determined at first, a quick glance. The first thought of St. Seraphim, expressed in the form of advice, is significant: people try throughout their lives to acquire as much worldly, and therefore vain, as possible, but at the same time they lose their souls, since material accumulations can never be compared with spiritual ones. It’s no secret that Elder Seraphim’s life itself became not a search for material wealth, but a model of strengthening the spirit. The Monk Seraphim of Sarov did not create new theories. He simply taught to live like a Christian, both with his good deeds, instructions, miracles, insights, healings, and with his entire spiritual appearance. The height of the feat lay in the strength of Father Seraphim’s humility, in the absence of external effect, so characteristic of pseudo-saints. “God, be merciful to me, a sinner”; “Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner” - these are the incessant prayers of the elder, which he raises to God. In the testimonies of contemporaries who cited the teachings of St. Seraphim of Sarov, however, as in the “Conversation of Father Seraphim,” nowhere is it said that he compared himself with the deity and mentally gave himself a proper assessment; everywhere we can observe an awareness of his own imperfection and heartfelt contrition about his sinfulness. The entire experience of Christianity shows that only deep humility can save a believer from the feeling of pride - one of the most terrible sins of humanity. It should curb passions and at the same time not evoke a sense of righteousness in a person, but, on the contrary, recognize the unworthiness of God’s care. It is enough just to remember the Gospel story about the Pharisee and the publican. Human righteousness - the highest virtue - is devalued in comparison with the absolute. This idea is contained in the words of the prophet Isaiah: “We have all become like one who is unclean, and all our righteousness is like filthy rags” (Is.64:6). Thus, any finite reality turns into insignificance before the absolute value that God is. The second phrase of the “Conversation” is also interesting, apparently advice to a woman who asked about spiritual help: “Do not be discouraged in anything and do not have despondency, which causes a great enemy, bring joy to the mind and everything is with us” (hereinafter, as far as possible, the punctuation and spelling of the original are preserved. - M.R.). Indeed, according to the testimony of everyone who knew Father Seraphim, he was never seen sad or despondent, and he tried to convey this joyful mood of spirit to others. Another piece of advice from the Sarov wonderworker, written down by his contemporary: “To keep fasting and abstinence, Wednesday and Friday, on Wednesday Christ was born, on Friday he suffered on the cross and died.” The authenticity of these words of Father Seraphim can be established from the “Chronicle of the Seraphim-Diveyevo Monastery,” compiled by Metropolitan Seraphim (Chichagov), which contains a fragment of the elder’s conversation with one of the Diveyevo sisters: “We, who live on earth, have lost our way a lot from the path of salvation; We anger the Lord by not keeping the Holy Spirit. posts; Nowadays Christians allow meat and St. Lent, and during every Lent; Wednesdays and Fridays are not saved; and the Church has a rule: those who do not keep St. Lent and throughout the summer, Wednesdays and Fridays sin a lot. But the Lord will not be completely angry, but will still have mercy. We have the Orthodox faith and the Church, which has no blemish. For the sake of these virtues, Russia will always be glorious and terrible and insurmountable to its enemies, having faith and piety in the shield and armor of truth: the gates of hell will not prevail against these.”55 The elder also advised the author of the “Conversation” recording to “keep silence”, “not to judge anyone”, “to always confess to the Lord”, “that the Lord will forgive me for having sinned in mind, soul, heart, word, deed, thought to all my feelings.” Continuing to instruct his interlocutor, the Monk Seraphim of Sarov emphasized the need to “always have (inaudible - M.R.) a lamp before God and ordered oil to be sent, that there is great benefit in it” 56. All this advice can obviously be taken in a figurative meaning: do not anger God, repent of your sins in time (“confess to the Lord”), but the main thing is to always be open to meeting God, including through prayer to Him, having a “burning” lamp before God. During his lifetime, the monk repeatedly advised all those who hungered for the truth from him to pray diligently. In the document “Conversation of Father Seraphim” this idea is clarified: “before lunch, say a prayer to Jesus, and after lunch to the Mother of God - and at all times.” From the “Conversation” it is also clear that St. Seraphim also answered personal questions that oppressed the petitioner. These are essentially the pieces of advice, for example, related to this woman’s husband: “Obey your husband’s will and caress him” (“caress him” crossed out. - M.R.). Another wonderful piece of advice that brought to us the spiritual light of the priest: “Don’t have a heart for anyone, if someone upsets and annoys you in the slightest, then keep silent, which will bring great benefit and great joy in the soul, but if you can’t stand something from your brother or you scolded him with your words, then there will be great embarrassment and the heart will not rest.” And this summary of the conversation ends with two notes. The first - “from the conversation he said, he understands that he was not talking about a perishable thing, but about eternity, and whether he upset you.” The last one is “try to find a bride yourself, marry your son while he’s still young” 57 . Now that the “Conversation” with the old man is almost completely presented, we will try to determine the age of the woman who recorded it. “Marry your son while he is still young” - in those days, a man who was already over thirty could be considered a “young” groom. If we take into account this factor and the fact that the woman’s son may not have been the first-born in her family, then the writer’s age is most likely over fifty. And if November 1830 is considered the date of the “Conversation,” then the woman who wrote it down could be born in 1775–1780, a contemporary of the mother of Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin. Why did we talk about Nadezhda Osipovna? The fact is that this recording of a conversation with St. Seraphim of Sarov was found in the collection of Pavel Vasilyevich Annenkov, Pushkin’s first biographer. In the same RGALI fund, in storage unit number 12, in inventory 2, the printed edition “Pushkin Alexander Sergeevich in the Alexander era 1799–1826” is stored. (Annenkov P.V. SPb., 1874). There are also other archival materials that illuminate certain aspects of Pushkin’s biography. Our document in the inventory is listed under the title “Conversation of Father Seraphim” (Sarovsky). Summary of the conversation (seventeen instructions). First quarter of the 19th century." Consequently, it is quite possible to assume that among the materials collected by Pushkin’s biographer, there could be a document that was also related to Alexander Sergeevich. But this is just a hypothesis. It can be proven if the handwriting of Nadezhda Osipovna Pushkina in her papers, starting from the second half of the 1820s until November 1830, matches the hand that wrote down the “Conversation”. But let’s return to St. Seraphim of Sarov. His holiness is the hard work of inner work to cleanse oneself from sinfulness. These are not external good deeds for which the Lord God rewards with high spiritual qualities. I can’t help but remember the prose poem by I.S. Turgenev about two rich men - Rockefeller, drowning in luxury, donating millions to charity, and a poor Russian peasant who took in an orphan. Which of them is the greater Christian? Probably, the one who humbly suffers for his good deeds endures, but at the same time improves morally. What is the use of the “good deeds” of those people whose inner world is not corrected, but remains full of vices and passions? The essence of the actions of Elder Seraphim is that they were moral guidelines for those who were called to spiritually educate readers in the field of literary enlightenment. No, it is not by chance that researcher JI.A suggests. Craval (“Pushkin and Saint Seraphim”) that his image appears on a poetic manuscript dedicated to the desert fathers... Following the precepts of Orthodoxy and its domestic ascetics, Russian literature saved more than one generation of readers when it seemed that the world was irrevocably mired in sin. Our literature is, first of all, faith in human capabilities, the implementation of which depends on spiritual priorities. It is in this context that both the specificity and exclusivity of national literary creativity will become most understandable. Spiritual knowledge, drawn from Russian classics, is similar to religious knowledge, which is extremely specific and deeply personal: it is a person’s knowledge of his innermost depth. Our classics are a window through which the world above communicates with the world below. For this reason, Russian aesthetic consciousness turned out to be unable to create an image of an evil spirit worthy of Goethe's Mephistopheles. The ideas of schism and rebellion have always been condemned in Russian literature; they were opposed to humility, patience, and mercy. The writer, according to N.V. Gogol, must unite the hearts of people in mercy, only then will he become a true artist and creator of words. For Gogol, Pushkin is an example of such a writer: “Pushkin was a connoisseur and true appraiser of everything great in man.” For Gogol, writer and preacher merge into one: “And how could it be otherwise, if spiritual nobility is already a characteristic of almost all of our writers?” “It is remarkable that in all other lands the writer is in some kind of disrespect from society regarding his personal character. It's the opposite here. In our country, even someone who is simply a doer and not a writer, and who is not only not handsome in soul, but even at times downright mean, is by no means revered as such in the depths of Russia. On the contrary, everyone in general, even those who have barely heard of writers, already has some kind of conviction that a writer is something higher, that he must certainly be noble, that many things are indecent for him, that he should not allow himself to do what is forgiven to others" 58 . Only Pushkin, with an unusually subtle sense of proportion, was able, using the example of the relationship between Grinev and Pugachev, to embody his ideal vision of a Russian person who, even in rebellion against the social attitudes of the individual, tries to remain a Christian. All this, of course, did not pass by Gogol, for whom Pushkin was not only a senior and respected comrade in the craft, but also an unsurpassed authority in knowledge of the origins of the spirituality of Russian people. It is no coincidence that Olga Nikolaevna Smirnova speaks about this in the preface to the memoirs of A.O. Smirnova-Rosset: “I often heard from my mother how much Pushkin influenced Gogol’s outlook. It seems to me (when studying their works this always struck me) that Pushkin’s influence penetrated deeply into Gogol’s soul and completely enveloped it. Nikolai Vasilyevich’s favorite Pushkin poem was “The Prophet”. Gogol, in essence, expressed the same thought, declaring that before writing, he must cleanse himself, prepare himself for his work by reflection, prayer and examination of his conscience" 59 . Five or six years before their deaths, both Pushkin and Gogol tried to talk “about the need for individual self-improvement as the starting point for the rise of the morality of the entire society” 60. And here the ascetic activity of St. Seraphim of Sarov had an unconditional influence on them. Motorin A.V. The Tabor joy of St. Seraphim of Sarov and the bright laughter of Gogol There is nothing further from European theories of comic, humor, and irony than Gogol’s teaching about bright, high, enthusiastic laughter. The writer’s thoughts on laughter, consistently presented since 1836, and artistically expressed already in “Evenings on a Farm near Dikanka” (1831), are surprisingly reminiscent of the judgments of ancient and new ascetics of the Orthodox spirit about Easter and Tabor joy. Gogol was brought up in a landowner's family, in that nation-forming rural environment where the gentry and peasants united spiritually around church parishes, participating together in divine services, in the construction of churches, in travel to holy places and monasteries. In the library of a rich relative of Gogol D.P. Troshchinsky had many Orthodox mystical works: translations of the writings of Macarius of Egypt, Maximus the Confessor, the works of Tikhon of Zadonsk and other holy ascetics of the Greek and Russian Church 61. The Gogol family used this library 62. Not only from the writings of the Fathers of the Church, but above all from the Gospel and Orthodox worship based on this primary source, Gogol, already in childhood, adolescence, and youth, could not help but perceive the thoughts of Christ and the apostles about special spiritual joy as the innermost basis and goal of the life of a Christian. This is Easter fun, associated with deep faith in the resurrection of the fallen world and man thanks to the cleansing of Christ on the cross and compassion with Him. “Blessed are those who mourn” and all the other sufferers of this world, for Christ assured them: “Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven” (Matthew 5:12). This was already prophesied in the Old Testament: “Rejoice and be glad in the Lord your God” (Joel 2:23). But if Easter joy cannot fully come until the end of this world, the resurrection of the dead, the Last Judgment and the beginning of the next century, then a certain foreshadowing is given through the luminous and joyful transfiguration of Christ on Mount Tabor. One of the main – the twelfth – holidays of the Orthodox Church is dedicated to the recollection and comprehension of this mysterious event. The thought of God of many Orthodox ascetics is based on an understanding of the divinely established grace of the luminous Tabor joy. The life of a Christian is not only a path of sorrow and suffering, but also a path of joy that overcomes this sorrow, the basis of which is the grace of communication of the human soul with God’s Spirit. Of the Orthodox ascetics closest in time to Gogol and at the same time accessible to him through printed works, such views were consistently and comprehensively expressed by Saint Tikhon of Zadonsk (1724–1783). According to his own testimony, he once saw how “the heavens opened up and there was such radiance and lightness that it is impossible to say with a mortal tongue and understand with the mind”; and, later recalling this spiritual “admiration,” he experienced “a certain joy” every time 63. Similar and even stronger spiritual experiences, later experienced more than once by Saint Tikhon, became the basis of his lengthy speculative judgments about the nature of Easter and Tabor light and fun. “By glorifying His holy body on Mount Tavorstei,” he said, “He filled us with joy and hope that God’s choices will be glorified in eternal life” 64. Saint Tikhon's gaiety was expressed, in particular, in his penchant for making jokes, and always at the expense of himself 65 . He understood and knew how to use the reconciling, healing power of laughter for the fallen world: “one should be laughed at with Christ who is mocked” 66 . Gogol’s special attention to the works of St. Tikhon, apparently rooted in his home upbringing, was fully revealed in the 1840s, after the completion of the first volume of “Dead Souls” - in conditions of a significant transformation of creative consciousness. Discussing the spiritual dangers on the path to achieving a “gracious state of soul” that brings us closer to the “Kingdom of Heaven,” Gogol, in a letter to A.P. Tolstoy dated March 29, 1845, refers to St. Tikhon as a leader in this task, which is paramount for every Christian: “Be strong and do not tire in prayers, do literally everything that I wrote to you regarding the reading of Tikhon, although I do not know whether you received my letter along with the book sent” 67. Perhaps the greatest confessor in the history of Russian holiness of the grace of the Holy Spirit, which appears to the human soul as light and joy, was Gogol’s contemporary, the Venerable Elder Seraphim of Sarov (1759–1833). Not being honored with a personal meeting with the miracle worker, the writer, in his own judgments about bright laughter or fun, is unprecedentedly close to the verbal and figurative revelations about the grace of the Holy Spirit that flowed out to the people who surrounded the elder in the last years of his life. The reason for such closeness, first of all, was the spiritual, liturgical and book environment common to all Orthodox people, in which more and more new generations of the Russian people were brought up. There was also probably some kind of influence of Saint Seraphim himself on Gogol, mediated by people’s retellings. One of these intermediaries may have been Pushkin. He could have met the holy elder by visiting Boldino in 1830 (after all, it is not far from the Sarov Monastery) 68. In any case, during his trips to Boldino, Pushkin was immersed in local stories about the miracles of St. Seraphim and could tell something to Gogol, who had been part of Pushkin’s circle of acquaintances since 1831. Gogol could have learned about the miracles of Saint Seraphim from the sister of his friend N.M., who was highly revered by him. Yazykova Ekaterina Mikhailovna, married (to the famous Slavophile) Khomyakova. H.A. was in love with this outstanding woman. Motovilov, who was destined to become, perhaps, the closest person to the Sarov elder. However, the elder predicted Motovilov's marriage to another woman 69. It was Motovilov, by the will of Saint Seraphim and with his help, who experienced the influx of the Holy Spirit and left the most complete and profound description of the experienced state of mind. This description, however, lay hidden until 1902, when it was discovered and prepared for publication by S.A. Nilus 70, but living oral traditions about such experiences, which the elder bestowed on the people around him, were already spreading in the 1830s. Gogol could have learned something about Saint Seraphim from his other friend N.P. Kireevskaya (nee Arbeneva), wife of the famous Slavophile I.V. Kireevsky. As a child, together with her mother Avdotya Nikolaevna Arbeneva, Zhukovsky’s niece, she visited Elder Seraphim. Thus, not only in the person of Natalya Petrovna Kireyevskaya, but also in the poet Zhukovsky, who was very close to himself, Gogol could find additional sources of the indirect spiritual influence of Saint Seraphim. N.P. Kireevskaya, even during Gogol’s lifetime, at least in 1850, distributed written memoirs “The Life of Father Seraphim” 71. First of all, we can talk about the inner spiritual closeness of Gogol and Elder Seraphim in the main question for every Orthodox person about intimate prayerful communication with God - communication that enlightens and delights the soul. In the 1840s, Gogol with special attention tested the possibilities of fervent prayer, verifying his comprehension with the experience of great saints. It was at this time that he immersed himself in mastering the works of the ascetics of the Orthodox Church, compiling, in the words of I.S. Aksakov, “whole volumes” of extracts 72. His letters at this time are filled with reflections on prayer, descriptions of its action (especially a letter to N.M. Yazykov dated November 4, 1843). Gogol’s main idea: with the effort of faith and purification of the heart through fasting and humility, one can hear in the soul the answers and advice of God Himself. This is in accordance with Orthodox teaching. Saint Seraphim of Sarov liked to use this kind of prayerful questioning when he himself was asked for advice: “I consider the first thought that appears in my soul to be an indication of God and I speak, not knowing what is in my interlocutor’s soul, but only believing that the will of God is showing me this for his benefit” 73 . Gogol writes to Yazykov: “Prayer is not a matter of words; it must be from all the powers of the soul and with all the powers of the soul; without that she will not fly. If she has reached the level of delight, then she is already asking for what God wants, and not for what we want. And the questions will be immediately followed by answers that will be straight from God. The beauty of these answers will be such that the entire composition will automatically turn into delight” 74. Like Saint Tikhon of Zadonsk, Elder Seraphim did not reject external manifestations of spiritual joy, answering those thirsty for advice “with a good-natured smile, often not without humor” 75. He saw in these moderate, humble manifestations of laughter the main spiritual content - grace-filled fun. He greeted all visitors with the words: “Christ is risen, my joy,” and then “he showed them the icon of the Mother of God “Tenderness,” which was always with him, and added: “Behold the Joy of all joys” 76. In the Mother of God he saw an example of how much a human being can be filled with the Holy Spirit, bestowing divine joy and enlightenment 77 . That is why he said: “Joy is not a sin, it drives away fatigue, but fatigue can cause despondency, and there is nothing worse than it. It brings everything with it” 78. Good and bright cheerfulness, inspired by the Holy Spirit, carries within itself the grace-filled power of life. One day Saint Seraphim, as can be seen from the memoirs of H.A. Motovilov, gave a particularly bright double revelation of the mystery of gracious light and gracious joy: on the one hand, in thoughtful theology, on the other, in experiential experience. According to his reasoning (as retold by N.A. Motovilov), it is necessary to distinguish between the “actions” in the souls of people of the Holy Spirit and “demonic darkness.” The Holy Spirit “acts in unison” with Christ, “always solemnly, making our hearts joyful and directing our steps onto a peaceful path” 79 . The elder considers the Spirit of God and Christ in unity and, speaking of One, means the Other: “the grace of the Holy Spirit shines in the heart from time immemorial with the former Divine light of the priceless merits of Christ”; “the light of Christ,” but also “the grace of the Holy Spirit is the light that enlightens man” 80. Saint Seraphim especially points out that this internal spiritual light, entering the human soul, also manifests itself externally: “Remember about Moses after his conversation with God on Mount Sinai. People could not look at him - he shone so with an extraordinary light that surrounded his face. Remember the Transfiguration of the Lord on Mount Tabor. A great light enveloped Him and “His robe shone like snow, and His disciples fell on their faces in fear.” And in this way the grace of the All-Holy Spirit of God appears in an indescribable light for everyone to whom God reveals its action” 81. To explain these words, Saint Seraphim vouchsafed H.A. Motovilov to experience such a state: “I looked into his face, and even greater awe fell upon me. Imagine, in the middle of the sun, in the most brilliant brightness of its midday rays, the face of a person talking to you” 82. And when at the same time Motovilov felt “extraordinary joy” in his “heart,” the elder explained: “When the Spirit of God descends on a person and overshadows him with the fullness of His influx, then the human soul is filled with indescribable joy, for the Spirit of God brings joy to everything that He touches” 83 . It is a significant coincidence: in the same year of 1831, when the Monk Seraphim taught Motovilov the doctrine of the luminous joy of the Holy Spirit, Gogol completed his “Evenings on a Farm near Dikanka,” where he depicted the dark and bright possibilities of spiritual joy. The contradictory laughter unity of “Evenings...” established by the author’s plan was astutely noted by Pushkin: “Joy, simple-minded and at the same time crafty” 84. Luminous spiritual joy radiates from the style of the beekeeper Rudy Panka, the author of prefaces, notes and - as one might guess from the play of the author's intention - the story "The Night Before Christmas". A beekeeper’s laughter is a light that dispels darkness and brings joy to all living things; it reveals countless facets of existence, accepts and affirms everything, denying only negation or evil itself. However, this laughter also tries to transform the carriers of evil - people and even evil spirits - and introduce them to the joy of being. From time to time, the beekeeper tries to find words to directly convey the emotional experiences caused by this bright laughter scattered everywhere. So, when Vakula’s beloved laughed, he “felt that everything inside him was laughing. This laughter seemed to immediately resonate in the heart and in the quietly trembling veins.” In the world of “The Night Before Christmas,” the image of the “merrily laughing night” triumphs - the Christmas night that gives the world the Light of Christ, which enlightens everyone. The stars and the moon shine “for the whole world, so that it will be fun to carol and glorify Christ.” In a world enlightened by divine jubilant laughter, even evil spirits, being ridiculed, become somewhat brightened and involuntarily begin to serve good. So, the devil, on whom the sign of the cross was imposed, is taking the pious blacksmith-icon painter to St. Petersburg. Much later, in a letter to S.P. Shevyrev dated April 27, 1847, Gogol admitted: “For a long time now, I’ve only been trying to make sure that after my work a person laughs at the devil to his heart’s content,” and immediately added that the old man who successfully laughed at the devil (Shevyrev wrote about this) “must be a Little Russian” 85. Apparently, Gogol then remembered his old beekeeper, who so successfully laughed at the evil spirits. According to Gogol, an artist who writes in divine inspiration is luminous. Later, in the story “Portrait”, the writer gave an image of such an artist who, significantly, became a monk and, like Vakula, an icon painter: he painted the image of the “Nativity of Jesus” for the church (and here is a similarity with the idea of ​​“The Night Before Christmas”). The face of the inspired icon painter in the “Portrait” “shone with the lightness of heavenly joy.” Rudy Panko also tries to discern signs of such luminosity in the narrator closest to himself in spirit, sexton Foma Grigorievich: “it seems that he is not even a noble person, but look at him: some kind of importance shines in his face. In church, when he sings on the wing - indescribable tenderness! It would seem that everything would have melted!..” So Motovilov, experiencing together with Saint Seraphim the influx of the Holy Spirit, felt “an extraordinary sweetness,” and the elder explained to him: “This is the sweetness about which the Holy Scripture says: “They will be drunk with the fatness of Thy house, and I will give to drink the stream of Thy sweetness.” <...> From this sweetness our hearts seem to melt, and we are both filled with such bliss that cannot be expressed in any language” 86. Gogol himself experienced something similar during his creative work; this was at least partly reflected in his portrait by F.A. Moller, written in the early 1840s and apparently donated by Gogol himself to A.S. Khomyakov (then the portrait ended up in the Historical Museum). Bearing in mind the special light emitted by the writer’s appearance in this portrait, S.T. Aksakov noted in a letter to his son Ivan: “This is how he was captured in the portrait of Moller, which you probably saw in Khomyakov’s work. This is how he happens in happy moments of creativity” 87. In a letter to N.M. Yazykov dated April 2, 1844, the writer concerns this “bright state” of divine inspiration, for the sake of which “the whole world works and all events take place” and “about which poets will hear in advance” 88. From the same letter it is clear that he intensively reads the “holy fathers”, basing his views on Orthodox tradition. Gogol portrayed negative, gloomy, demonic fun in “Evenings...” on behalf of other narrators: the panicky Makar Nazarovich and the terrible narrator of “Terrible Vengeance,” whose name the beekeeper did not even dare to mention by nightfall, as if he were the embodiment of the evil spirit itself. A proud romantic, the panic arrogantly laughed at his own heroes, at the entire human race, at the universe, considering it all a play of his creative imagination. But in the end, he is forced to admit that his artificial self-imposed cheerfulness, drawn from the depths of his own supposedly divine soul, inevitably dries up and does not bring true joy and happiness: “Isn’t it true that joy, a beautiful and fickle guest, flies away from us and in vain does a lonely sound think to express joy? In his own echo he already hears sadness and desert and wildly listens to it” (“Sorochinskaya Fair”). In “Terrible Revenge,” the narrator’s evil merriment permeates the entire narrative. Destructive, essentially satanic laughter becomes a fatal force, a kind of anti-Christian substitute for the bright divine joy bestowed by the Holy Spirit. From childhood, the unfortunate sorcerer, doomed to a terrible death even before birth, thought that all people were laughing at him. He felt in this laughter the will of the owner of the world - the devil and involuntarily fulfilled an evil predestination: he killed for laughter. And from this same laughter he should have died himself: “The horse neighed wildly, raising its mane, and rushed towards the knight. Here it seems to the sorcerer that everything in him has frozen, that the motionless horseman is moving and at once opened his eyes; he saw the sorcerer rushing towards him and laughed. Like thunder, wild laughter scattered across the mountains and sounded in the sorcerer’s heart, shaking everything that was inside him. It seemed to him that it was as if someone strong had climbed into him and was walking inside him and beating his heart and veins with hammers <...> that laughter reverberated through him so terribly!” The sorcerer’s distant ancestor burst out with the same laugh during the crime: “Petro laughed and pushed him with a pike...”. Peter’s victim Ivan also dreams of enjoying the evil joy of revenge: “And I would have fun looking at his torment!” In his further work, Gogol increasingly focused on developing the positive possibilities of laughter as an enlightening force that heals the human soul. First of all, he is attracted by the positive charge of vitality contained in the very joy bestowed by the Holy Spirit. Genuine laughter is always humble and non-judgmental: it is directed against moral shortcomings, but not against people created by God in His image and likeness. From time immemorial, Christian consciousness has recognized and used the healing potential of ridicule 89. But the main focus has always been on God-given joy as the source of all the healing possibilities of laughter. The secularly educated society of Gogol’s time had already to a large extent broken away from the Orthodox origins of Russian self-awareness, and the spiritual nature of Gogol’s laughter turned out to be completely incomprehensible to readers and critics. Gogol's laughter was for them only a means of proud and self-satisfied condemnation of others, and not a source of repentant and humble self-condemnation and - through that - their own spiritual healing. Summing up a preliminary summary of his work, the writer admitted in “” (1847): “I didn’t know even then that my name was in use only to reproach each other and laugh at each other.” This realization came to him in the second half of the 1830s. It was expressed in the epigraph to “The Inspector General,” which appeared during the revision of the comedy for the 1842 edition: “There is no point in blaming the mirror if your face is crooked.” It was also imprinted in the words of the mayor, added at the same time, addressed to the audience: “Why are you laughing? You’re laughing at yourself!..” It was also reflected in the final chapter of the first volume of “Dead Souls”: “And which of you, full of Christian humility, will deepen this difficult question inside your own soul: “Isn’t there some part of Chichikov in me?” No matter how it is! But if at that time some acquaintance of his passed by, he would at that very moment push his neighbor’s arm and say to him, almost snorting with laughter: “Look, look, there’s Chichikov, Chichikov has gone!” To eliminate misunderstandings among readers, Gogol, starting from the second half of the 1830s, thoroughly developed the doctrine of “bright,” “life-giving,” beneficial “laughter” as a special creative and cognitive “power” of the soul. By laughter he means not so much external physiological manifestations as internal emotional experiences. This teaching is reflected in a number of works: “The St. Petersburg Stage in 1835–36” (1836), “Theatrical travel after the presentation of a new comedy” (1836–1842), in the seventh chapter of “Dead Souls” (1835–1841). Gogol distinguishes, on the one hand, evil, destructive, proud, insignificant laughter, which does not heal, but stings the human soul (in origin it is the laughter of unclean spirits), and on the other, kind, humble, bright, creative, healing laughter, arising in the soul through the action of descending divine grace: “No, laughter is more significant and deeper than they think. Not the kind of laughter that is generated by temporary irritability, a bilious, painful disposition of character; not that light laughter that serves for idle entertainment and amusement of people, but that laughter that flows entirely from the bright nature of man, flows out of it because at its bottom lies an ever-bubbling spring of it. The only thing that outrages you is that it is dark, but laughter is bright. Many things would outrage a person if they were presented in their nakedness; but, illuminated by the power of laughter, it already brings reconciliation to the soul” (“Theatrical tour after the presentation of a new comedy”). Kind, bright laughter is spiritual, it elevates the soul, directing it to the sky: “High, enthusiastic laughter is worthy of standing next to the high lyrical movement” (the seventh chapter of “Dead Souls”). In such reasoning, Gogol nevertheless expresses himself almost allegorically, taking into account the state of his contemporary secularly educated consciousness and fearing to scare away too enlightened (in the spirit of the new times) admirers of his talent. In private letters and in essays not intended for the general reader, he expresses himself bluntly. Thus, in “The Rule of Living in the World” (1843–1844), the writer sums up his thoughts about the bright divine laughter: “God is light, and therefore we must strive for light. God is the supreme joy, and therefore we should also be bright and cheerful. We are cheerful precisely when everything is erected against us in order to confuse and sadden us” 90. It can be confidently stated that neither before Gogol, nor with him, nor after him in the field of new secular Russian literature did any writer achieve such a true comprehension and such a complete verbal expression of the Orthodox mystery of spiritual joy 91. In this sense, Gogol came closer than other writers to the shining heights of Saint Seraphim. Melnik V.I. Venerable Seraphim of Sarov and the Simbirsk intelligentsia (Religious education of I.A. Goncharov) During the era of St. Seraphim of Sarov, religious morals among the nobility fell sharply. As for the higher society of St. Petersburg, the facts are well known (the Decembrist uprising, a completely typical French upbringing in the circle of the Pushkin Lyceum, etc.). We know much less about the religious state of the Russian province, in particular about the education of the future Russian intelligentsia. In the book “Great in Small” by S.A. Nilus writes about this: “At the beginning of the 19th century, the faith of the Russian outback was still little shaken: life then did not know the speed of spreading spiritual infection that marked our time, the time of steam, electricity, railways...” 92. Has this always been the case, as the famous historian of Russian Orthodoxy writes? S.A. Nilus reports on the spiritual education of the famous “servant of Serafimov” Nikolai Motovilov, in whose family the Orthodox tradition was extremely strong and uninterrupted. The future “Servant of Seraphim” and the future writer, author of “Oblomov”, were practically the same age, grew up in the same places (Simbirsk province), but still had different religious inoculations. Goncharov's hometown of Simbirsk was spiritually connected with St. Seraphim of Sarov by many threads. Many townspeople, starting from 1815, when Father Seraphim came out of seclusion, received spiritual guidance from him. According to S.A. Nilus, by 1816, when H.A. Motovilov first came with his mother to the monk, “the glory of Father Seraphim thundered throughout the believers of the Tambov and Middle Volga region” 93 . Of course, they also heard about him in the deeply religious Goncharov family. In addition, in the Simbirsk province, in the Alatyr Holy Trinity Monastery, it was planned to appoint Father Seraphim as rector in 1796. And although he did not accept the offer and remained in Sarov, he still said that he would be present in Alatyr in spirit (the monks of the Alatyr Monastery remember this to this day). Here, in Simbirsk, blessed Andrei, the Simbirsk wonderworker, labored, of whom the Monk Seraphim knew well. In “Oblomov’s Dream,” the novelist describes his hometown as a place of sleep and peace, a place where religious ritual reigns, covering up an essentially semi-pagan attitude to life. Here sleep and food come to the fore: “What stocks of jams, pickles, and cookies were there! What honeys, what kvass were brewed, what pies were baked in Oblomovka!” 94. There is also idle talk, gossip, an indifferent attitude towards one’s neighbor (the whole village went to look at the sick man who had fallen powerless, touched it with a pitchfork and left!). Paganism, which miraculously coexisted with Orthodox ritual, was, of course, bound to make a deep impression on the future writer. And yet, Simbirsk as a whole was, in religious terms, a city not without grace. The only exception was the urban noble elite. Goncharov spent his childhood in a family with strict Orthodox traditions. His father Alexander Ivanovich (1754–1819) was a fairly prosperous merchant, grain merchant, and owner of a candle factory. He was repeatedly elected mayor of Simbirsk. In 1803, having become a widower, he married the merchant’s daughter Avdotya Matveevna Shakhtorina (1785–1851). Goncharov recalled his mother as an “extraordinarily intelligent, perspicacious woman”; she was a moral authority for the children, before whom they “bowed with respect, love and gratitude that was never violated.” The family turned out to be quite large: besides Goncharov, there were three more children. Brother Nikolai (1808–1873) became a gymnasium teacher, and in the late 1850s - early 1860s - editor of the newspaper Simbirsk Provincial Gazette. There were also sisters: Alexandra (by her husband, Kirmalova, 1815–1896) and Anna (by her husband, Muzalevskaya, 1818–1898). After the death of Alexander Ivanovich, the children were raised by their godfather, a retired sailor, nobleman Nikolai Nikolaevich Tregubov. We need to talk about him separately. Goncharov’s father, according to some information, was an Old Believer and a man who lived in the traditions of Christian piety. Almost miraculously, some family heirlooms of the Goncharovs have reached us, which speak volumes about the spiritual mood of the family. What is the evidence of the family “Chronicle” alone worth! The writer’s paternal grandfather, Ivan Ivanovich Goncharov, took on a kind of spiritual feat in the 1720s: for several years he rewrote the book “The Passion of Christ.” This book monument described in detail the last days of the life of Jesus Christ. There is no doubt that even in childhood, little Vanya Goncharov heard this grandfather’s book read and held it in his hands. One can imagine what an impressionable boy felt and experienced when one of the adults read: “On the morning of Friday, he brought our Lord Jesus Christ into the courtyard of Caiaphas the bishop and laid a great iron on Him on His neck and hand and brought Him to the courtyard of Caiaphas, and then the Jews, small and large, gathered in repentance and with great joy, as if they had Him in their hands they began to beat Him on His cheeks and on His forehead and spitting tongue, like in His simple face and in His most pure hair and in His holy lips...” 95 . And what an ardent faith, what a fine fellow this Ivan Ivanovich was, who ended his work with these words: “For the glory of the holy consubstantial and indivisible Trinity of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, this God-inspired book was written: The Passion of the Lord God and our Savior Jesus Christ Years from the creation of the world 7236: the year from the incarnation of the Lord God and our Savior Jesus Christ 1728: the year of September The 14th day of the Saldak son of Ivan Ivanov Bolshago Goncharov was written in the city of Sinbirsk from this Ivan Goncharov with a sinful hand, like a chamois, get rid of the snares, and so I am from this work, amen” 96. However, here’s what’s surprising: the writer Goncharov never remembered this book, as if he had never read it at all. But besides “The Passion of Christ,” there was so much interesting stuff there: this is a real chronicle of a family, where several generations of literate Goncharovs wrote down notes about all the most important events of their lives! Here it was indicated when he was born, married, finally died, and in which cemetery a person of the Goncharov family-tribe was buried! Ivan Aleksandrovich certainly could not help but know this book. And the future writer’s mother, the religious Avdotya Matveevna, who put a lot of effort into the spiritual education of her children (God will pay for it!), could not ignore this book and not read it to her children. It is known that even at home she often prayed and read akathists. And yet it is a fact: the book did not leave a visible mark on the writer’s life, although he admitted that from the age of eight he read avidly everything that came to hand. In his autobiographies he mentions Derzhavin, Radcliffe, various travels and much, much more... But he doesn’t name his family ledger. Perhaps, however, due to his inherent secrecy and spiritual chastity. In general, it must be said: Goncharov’s religious life was unknown, perhaps, to any of his contemporaries, except perhaps his confessor, who after the writer’s death said several warm and very weighty words about his personality. Therefore, it is extremely difficult to talk about the religiosity of the author of Oblomov. It's easy to get into trouble. Let's note one thing for now. In Goncharov’s works, next to the serious figure of Oblomov, the comical face of Zakhar is revealed. Next to the pathetic scene, filled with tragedy, there is a rustic, almost parodic episode that sharply reduces it. Goncharov deliberately hides behind humor, “jokes”, and avoids pathos. This misled many who denied Goncharov the depth of his creativity and worldview. But also M.F. Speransky wrote in 1913: “As for internal religiosity, we know very little about it. He did not allow prying eyes into this holy of holies of his soul. He didn’t like to talk about religion with people who were indifferent to it <...> or would get off with little meaningful phrases <...> he was not able to express his sincere thoughts in this area, and if he accidentally let it slip, he immediately tried to restrain himself, immediately laugh at himself” 97 . There is no doubt that the writer received a serious religious background in his family. However, something else is also clear: the first half of Goncharov’s life developed in such a way that spiritually and religiously he was more likely to break away from his relatives, “dense”, as it probably seemed to him, roots, than to fall to them. The same age and fellow countryman of the novelist, Nikolai Motovilov, was raised by his mother, widow, Maria Alexandrovna. A similar situation arose in the Goncharovs’ house: the writer’s elderly father died when Vanyusha was only seven years old. But the mother took the future “servant of Seraphim” with her on a pilgrimage to the monk in Sarov. This had a beneficial effect on his entire life. Apparently, the widow Motovilova had a lot of such trips (after all, she died during a pilgrimage to the Kyiv shrines). She loved to welcome wanderers and nuns into her home. As for the Goncharov house, unfortunately, we don’t know about anything like that. We have not received information about the Goncharovs’ hospitality or their pilgrimage to holy places. They lived, like many, however, in Simbirsk, secluded, with family concerns, plans for a decent education for their children. Wide horizons of a new Russian life and culture, completely secular, were opening up before Goncharov. Beyond the Volga, in the village of Gepyevka, in a private boarding school, he was raised for three years (1820–1822) by priest Fyodor Stepanovich Troitsky. In addition to German and French, little Goncharov studied, among other things, the Law of God and Sacred History. F. S. Troitsky was married to a Lutheran who converted to Orthodoxy. In the novel “The Precipice”, perhaps it is no coincidence that the characters call the priest unusually: by his first name and patronymic (Nikolai Ivanovich), and this priest’s reading circle includes such thinkers as Spinoza, Voltaire, Feuerbach... Be that as it may, the writer’s favorite words for the rest of his life will remain “culture”, “humanity”, “civilization”, “comfort”. Nevertheless, both the “Chronicle” and the stubborn, ardent-in-spirit grandfather Ivan Ivanovich Goncharov played their role in the life of the author of “Oblomov”. And what else! Still, the Orthodox ferment was not in vain, and the second half of Goncharov’s life is a slow, with retreats and difficulties, but still a return to his grandfather’s “infantile” faith, as the writer himself called it. This path back from the “God the Civilizer,” a God almost Protestantly interpreted, to the God of Ivan’s grandfather was complicated. Judging by the novel “Oblomov,” the mother of the future writer Avdotya Matveevna tried to teach him to pray: “Kneeling down and hugging him with one hand, she prompted him with the words of prayer. The boy repeated them absentmindedly, looking out the window, from where coolness and the smell of lilac poured into the room. - Shall we go for a walk today, Mama? - he suddenly asked in the middle of prayer. “Let’s go, darling,” she said hastily, without taking her eyes off the icon and hastening to finish the holy words. The boy repeated them listlessly, but the mother put her whole soul into them” (4, 111). No matter how hard Avdotya Matveevna tried, she failed to awaken a spark of ardent love for God in her son’s soul. In the drafts of the essay “In the Homeland,” he admits: “You used to run away to him (godfather Nikolai Nikolaevich Tregubov. - V.M.) when you had to go to the all-night vigil, or in bad weather, when she (mother. - V.M.) was sewing, read aloud to her, or while she was praying, on her knees, Akathist to the Savior...” 98. Grandfather's and maternal values ​​retreated in Goncharov's childhood before the influence of the mentioned godfather. Goncharov recalled about him that he was a man of “a rare, sublime soul, natural nobility and at the same time the kindest, most beautiful heart.” “Especially,” he wrote, “his conversations about mathematical and physical geography, astronomy, cosmogony in general, and then navigation were clear and invaluable to me” (7, 238). But it seems that Tregubov’s influence on the writer’s soul was not so clearly good. Tregubov was a Freemason and an atheist. Only after December 14, 1825, when the government began to persecute Masonic lodges in Russia, did all the Masons in Simbirsk “sew their own uniforms; recent atheists appeared on solemn days for prayers in the cathedral... My “godfather,” under the spell of former fear, also echoed the others” (7, 247). Tregubov was a kind of counterweight to his mother’s religious influence and, judging by the writer’s later life, a powerful counterweight. Goncharov’s soul was not as reliably protected from such influences as the soul of H.A. Motovilov, whose father “foresaw death from Freemasonry, which, as a novelty, the last word of European education, the most prominent provincial figures began to get carried away with. - Look, mother, take care of Kolya from the Masons if I’m gone! In my name, order him not to join their God-fighting society - it will destroy Russia! Motovilov himself heard such speeches from his father. Motovilov remained an implacable enemy of this secret and essentially deeply revolutionary society for the rest of his life” 99. This was not the case with the future novelist, who had been in contact since childhood with his godfather, a Freemason who lived with the Goncharov family in the same house. Throughout his life, Goncharov will try to combine faith in Christ with the spirit of civilization and culture. The ardor of faith, so characteristic of the Goncharovs’ ancestors, no longer affected him in spirit. Communication with a religiously indifferent liberal society, such as the Vestnik Evropy circle, only hindered the writer’s return to the mother’s womb of the Church. And one must also be surprised that Goncharov still retained the healthy Orthodox instinct of his ancestors and, without advertising his religious views, still walked alone back to that “infant faith” about which in his letter to A.F. Koni on June 30, 1886, he remarked: “I look with tenderness at those old men and women, crushed in spirit and crushed by life, who, nesting along the wall in churches or in their closets in front of the lamp, quietly and resignedly bear their yoke and see in life and above life only the cross and the Gospel, they believe in this alone and hope for this alone! Why are we not like that? “They are foolish, blessed,” say the sage thinkers. No, these are people, these are those to whom that which is hidden from the smart and reasonable is revealed; these are the kingdom of God, and they will be called sons of God!” 100. All this was influenced by the leaven obtained in the family, and even in the provincial city itself. By the way, in Simbirsk, from time immemorial, faith was strong and religiously outstanding individuals labored. The general atmosphere in the city has always been of a high religious spirit. Plays by A.N. Ostrovsky (for example, “The Thunderstorm”) do not convey the true picture of life in such Volga towns as Simbirsk. Not only Boars and Wild people lived there. During the days of Goncharov’s childhood, there were frequent trips of Simbirians to the great ascetic of the Russian Land, St. Seraphim of Sarov. And he told them: “Why are you bothering to come to me, poor thing, - you have better food than me, your Andrei Ilyich...”. Indeed, Andrei Ilyich, glorified by the Church as a locally revered saint in 1998, was the soul of old Simbirsk in the 19th century, its intercessor and guardian angel. He was a man of great talents; everyone in the city knew and loved him. Blessed Andrei Ilyich was revered by all Simbirsk people, regardless of what class they belonged to, as the intercessor and guardian of Simbirsk. At that time it was a very small town of nobles and merchants, so Andrei Ilyich’s life passed, one might say, in front of all the townspeople, which is why many episodes of his life were preserved in people’s memory. Wooden Simbirsk, as you know, has burned repeatedly. However, during Andrei Ilyich’s lifetime there were never large, devastating fires in the city. It is interesting that after the death of the saint, fires in Simbirsk resumed. From early childhood, Andrei Ilyich took upon himself the feat of silence and explained himself with gestures. All the townspeople knew that every action of Andrei Ilyich had a hidden meaning. If he gave money to someone, then the person was promoted to success in business or was promoted. If blessed Andrew gave a person a sliver of wood or a handful of earth, then this was a sign of imminent death. He often warned people about death, preparing them for a Christian death, and by coming to their house and, stretching out, like a deceased person, lying down under the images in the front corner. The blessed one not only abandoned many conventions, shoes, clothes. His asceticism surpassed all imagination. There are cases when he could pull cast iron pots straight from the fire. Andrei Ilyich kissed the boiling samovar many times, and, moreover, if he doused himself with boiling water, he did not suffer at all because of it. Townspeople often saw him standing barefoot in the snowdrifts for whole nights. He often stood almost naked at a street intersection and, swaying from side to side, shifting from foot to foot, repeated: “Bo-bo-bo.” He especially often stood in the snowdrifts of the night in front of the altar of the Ascension Cathedral, which was located on Bolshaya Saratovskaya Street. There he was repeatedly found standing in the snow by priest V.Ya. Arkhangelsky, who was the confessor of the blessed one. In severe winter frosts, Andrei Ilyich stood in the cold water of Lake Marishka. The blessed one died in 1841. At this time, Goncharov was already 29 years old, he managed to graduate from Moscow University, serve for a year as secretary of the office of the Simbirsk governor A.M. Zagryazhsky, and then get a position, not without the help of the same Zagryazhsky, in the Ministry of Finance. Ivan Alexandrovich’s deeply religious mother, undoubtedly, like all the townspeople, revered the holy man. Moreover, in the museum I.A. Goncharov now has a portrait of St. Blessed Andrei of Simbirsk, painted, obviously, during his lifetime and kept in the Goncharovs’ house. In the book dedicated to Blessed Andrei, it is said that this portrait “was located above the desk of the Simbirian writer I.A. Goncharov, who mentioned the blessed one in his works" 101. However, the bitter truth is that Ivan Aleksandrovich never felt a craving for the so-called folk Orthodoxy, with its holy fools, soothsayers, ascetics (the Christian scholarly thinker Blessed Augustine, with whose works the author of “The Precipice” was familiar), was much clearer and closer to him), and naturally passed by this outstanding, but unknown ascetic in the cultural world. No matter how good the idyllic picture is, in all likelihood, the portrait of blessed Andrei never hung above the desk of the “Simbirian writer” Goncharov. Neither in his autobiography, nor in his memoirs “At Homeland” does the novelist speak about this living legend of Simbirsk. Only once, in a letter to his sister Anna Aleksandrovna Muzalevskaya on September 20, 1861, he wrote about his nephew Viktor Mikhailovich Kirmalov: “Upon my return here, I found him pale, exhausted, extremely shaggy in places, under the muscles more, in tattered clothes and, moreover, walking through the mud without galoshes, so if he had learned to pronounce regularly: bi, bi, bo, bo, bo - so he could have taken the post of Simbirsk Andreyushka with great success, which he had been correcting with such success for 30 or 40 years” 102. Ivan Aleksandrovich remembered blessed Andrei Ilyich well. So good that he calls him what most of the townspeople called him: “Andreyushka.” And yet, in his declining years, he would derogatorily mention Blessed Andrei’s habit of indistinctly “mumbling,” known throughout the city. The writer will never say anything more about Saint Blessed Andrew, the Simbirsk wonderworker. And this is symbolic in its own way. Growing up under the cover of the blessed one’s prayers, unfortunately, he did not notice his holiness, but only noted the strangeness of his behavior. Having passed by blessed Andrew, he also passed by the Monk Seraphim. To tell the truth, he does not mention the Goncharovs and numerous other Russian saints. Although in his texts one can find references to St. Augustine. This was already typical for that time education in the provinces. In general, it, although in a slightly different version, resembled what was happening in many secular houses in St. Petersburg and Moscow. In the future, life itself made, as a rule, significant adjustments to the religious education of the individual. Goncharov ended his life as a true Christian. Already by the time of writing “The Precipice”, the shade of Protestantism, the attraction to the earthly, bourgeois, in essence, arrangement of life, was replaced in Goncharov’s worldview by true Orthodoxy. This is explained by the fact that the writer realized how disastrous the gap between various strata of society and the Church had been on the historical paths of Russia. After all, the talk in “The Precipice” is not only about Orthodoxy as a traditional religion for Russia, but also about the Church and its protective cover. By the time of writing the last novel, let us not forget, Goncharov had been carefully attending Sunday services for a number of years, confessing and receiving communion in the church of the holy great martyr and healer Panteleimon in St. Petersburg. His spiritual father, Archpriest Gavriil Vasilyevich Krymov, serves in this church. After the death of Father Gabriel, from 1880, Archpriest of the same church Vasily Peretersky 103 became Goncharov’s confessor. The latter left an interesting letter on this subject to Goncharov’s biographer M.F. Speransky: “I have been serving in the parish of the Panteleimon Church since 1869, continuously for over 40 years. In the same parish, Mokhovaya St., No. 3 <...> Ivan Aleksandrovich Goncharov lived in the same apartment for over 30 years. The news that he was a person completely indifferent to religion, did not perform the rites of the Church, did not receive communion, etc., I think, was made up by someone and is completely untrue. I can testify that he was a believer, although, perhaps, due to the custom of the time and due to secular relations, he did not always strictly observe the customs and orders of the Orthodox Church in his life. I went to the church of God on Sundays and holidays; annually performed the Christian duty of confession and St. communion in his parish church, which is especially memorable to us because he confessed and received communion when there were already very few communicants in the parish church, namely on Holy Saturday at the late liturgy, which begins only at 1 o’clock in the afternoon and, presumably, ends already at 3 o’clock in the afternoon, which is why there are already few communicants on it, but always necessarily I.A. Goncharov. At first, his confessor was indeed our Archpriest Gavriil Vasilyevich Krymov, and after his death in January 1880, from that year, Goncharov constantly confessed to me every year until his death and received communion in our church. I advised him during his last dying illness; I then received from him a Christianly humble request that they would not bury him as a writer, in the Volkovsky cemetery, but that they would bury him as a simple Christian, modestly, simply, without any pomp and deliberate pomp and noise that students usually arrange when burying writers, in the Nevsky Lavra. <...> I finally served after his death, held a memorial service over his ashes, escorted him to the Lavra and, in the usual manner, after the funeral service in the Dulovskaya Church, buried him in the Nikolskoye Lavra cemetery. For many years, as a parishioner, he was a member of the parish Benevolent Society. Everything that has been said above, over many years of personal acquaintance and spiritual relationships, gives me firm grounds to testify that the late Ivan Alexandrovich, at least for the last 20 years, was and died a true believing son of the Orthodox Church" 104. At the end of his life, Goncharov recognized the intellectual rejection of the Church and the “rude priests” as a disease of his time and personality. The novelist, first of all, already lives a different religious life, more direct, with some maximalist demands inherent in purely Russian Orthodoxy. The religious life of his heroes will also change in the last novel. His notes entitled “An Extraordinary History” are very typical for clarifying the writer’s religious sentiments at the end of his life. They outline the complex history of Goncharov’s relationship with his “friend-rival” in the literature of I.S. Turgenev. There is no spirit of malice in “An Extraordinary Story.” Moreover, summing up his literary and human destiny, Goncharov clearly shows that he has come to the truth of the Gospel: “In this whole pitiful story, I read the lessons of Providence and bless His Justice, Wisdom and Goodness! Two Gospel examples happened to me: I was lazy and careless with my talent, I buried it, and it was taken away from me and given to another... Then I did not forgive him my first debt, I remembered it with indignation - and now I am paying for my debts. Now and after, I sincerely forgive both him and all those who so persistently, blindly and unreasonably did evil to me, and for the fact that I deserve evil, may God forgive us all!” 105. In 1888, in a letter to A.F. He confesses to Horses: “I have a treasure in my soul that I will not give up - and I hope it will bring me to the last limit!” 106. This treasure was the Orthodox faith, to which the writer clung with all his soul in the second half of his life. Trust in Christ did not deceive the writer. Suffice it to recall a few lines of A.F.’s memoirs. Kony: “A deep faith in another life accompanied him to the end. I visited him two days before his death, and when I expressed the hope that he would recover, he looked at me with his remaining eye, in which life still flickered and flashed, and said in a firm voice: “No! I'll die! Tonight I saw Christ, and he forgave me...” 107. Nikolai Motovilov, who was only four years older than Goncharov and grew up in seemingly similar conditions, went through a completely different life path. He developed into an outstanding religious personality and was even known among his contemporaries as a “violent” person, in other words, almost crazy. In modern Simbirsk-Ulyanovsk, almost no one knows his name, despite the fact that he lived in Simbirsk for a long time, was in public service and suffered terrible persecution from the people described by Goncharov in his wonderful essay “In the Motherland.” Goncharov and Motovilov had a common circle of acquaintances, but they felt completely differently in this circle. Simbirsk is called the city of I.A. Goncharova and N.M. Karamzina, V.I. Ulyanov-Lenin and A.F. Kerensky. But how closely, by the will of fate, this city turned out to be connected with the name of St. Seraphim of Sarov - through his “servant” Nikolai Motovilov and Saint Blessed Andrew! It's a pity that almost no one remembers about this. Novikova A.A. Epigraph from “The Life of Elder Seraphim” in the plot of the Christmas story by N.S. Leskova "The Beast" The name of St. Seraphim of Sarov, placed at the very beginning of Leskov’s story “The Beast” (1883), is the key to the accomplishment of all the miracles of the Christmas story about a man and a bear, all those psychological transformations that many researchers still seem “incredible”, tailored to the “Yuletide task”: to transform a misanthrope into a man-lover, a misanthrope into a philanthropist and benefactor. In fact, the events of “The Beast” do not contradict the logic of the Christmas plot - the logic of a good fairy tale, since in the Nativity of Christ people were given “a hope beyond hope,” “for we are saved in hope” (Rom. 8:18–25). Leskov prefaced the story “The Beast” with an epigraph: “And the animals listened to the holy word. Life of Elder Seraphim" 108. In this context, the meaning of the story deepens: the hero, recognized in the Christmas story as a wild beast, even more ruthless than a bear, takes on a human face under the influence of the holy word “Christmas sermon”. The author creates an expressive image of a man-beast, an merciless and cruel misanthrope. The misanthrope hero in Leskov's story appears without a name - he is known as the uncle of his five-year-old nephew, who, having become an adult, recalls the amazing transformation that took place on those distant but unforgettable Christmastide. The leading motive for creating the image of the uncle - the embodiment of spiritual hardness, inner cold - is reinforced by the theme of winter, frost, severe cold. In unison with the uncle’s character, an expressive image of an “all-destroying winter” is drawn: “It was winter, and a very cruel one. It was so cold that sheep froze in the barns at night, and sparrows and jackdaws fell numb on the frozen ground” (7, 26). If we remember that Christ was born in the most unpretentious setting - namely, in a stable, and domestic animals warmed the Divine Infant with their breath on a cold night - the frosty elements in Leskov’s story will seem especially frightening. Leskov’s story about the bad weather briefly says that “on the occasion of terrible cold weather,” the little hero’s mother, who was going to visit her husband on Christmas Day, “so as not to leave him alone on this wonderful and joyful holiday” (7, 26), does not take her son with her, entrusting him to the care of her sister, who was “married to an Oryol landowner, about whom there was a sad reputation. He was very rich, old and cruel. His character was dominated by malice and inexorability” (7, 26). The theme of the uncle is not only cold, but also the darkness that goes hand in hand with it. Cold and darkness are stable attributes of evil, which, according to Christian teaching, is not ontological, not essential, and therefore strives into oblivion, into emptiness. Externally and internally, the frost-covered uncle resembles a “living corpse,” a ghost. It is no coincidence that the uncle, the nameless hero of Leskov’s story “The Beast”, in whose image we can easily distinguish the hard-hearted uncle of the writer Strakhov, was wittily called by the American researcher Hugh MacLane “Mr. Fear” 109 . This coincidence - a surname corresponding to the character - allows us to imagine Strakhov as the living embodiment of the terrible, the personification of fear. Initially, the emotional and semantic dominant of Leskov’s Christmas story is precisely fear, diffused throughout the entire atmosphere of the narrative, embedded in the consciousness and hearts of everyone who encountered the “unmerciful” landowner: “everyone was afraid of my uncle,” “I stayed in the house of such a master reluctantly and with considerable fear” (7, 26). The “fantastic” in Leskov’s story is mainly not of an otherworldly nature, but of a socio-psychological one. Although even here it cannot happen without the intervention of God’s Providence. The author insists on the Christian basis of the hero's Christmas transfiguration according to the promise of the Gospel that God does not want the sinner to perish, the gates to salvation are open for him. Already the epigraph to “The Beast,” taken by Leskov from a spiritual source authoritative for Orthodox Christians - the life of St. Seraphim of Sarov, indicates the real possibility of embodying the main theme of the story: the acquisition of a truly human face by the “man-beast.” “Reverend Seraphim,” wrote the researcher of Russian holiness G.P. Fedotov, - combines the features of deep tradition with the bold, prophetic promise of the new. The stylite, the cohabitant of the forest bear, who defines the meaning of spiritual feat with the words of Macarius of Egypt, he, with his white clothes, Easter greetings and call to joy, already revealed in the flesh, with the bright mystery of transfiguration, testifies to new spiritual times” 110. The “evil and inexorable” character of the hero of the story “The Beast,” who “did not want to know mercy and did not love it, because he considered it weakness” (7, 27), is unrecognizable in the finale: he “as if by a miracle knew how to find out where true grief was, and knew how to get there on time” (7, 44). Christmas time is a truly universal time of spiritual unity and human kinship. On the days of the Nativity of Christ, when the birth of the Divine Child evokes an enthusiastic angelic choir: “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men!” (Luke 2:14), - the ice of the frozen block-hero is melted by the first good results. Leskov also tirelessly called for “by all means in our power to increase the amount of good in ourselves and around us” 111. Some researchers reproached the author of the story “The Beast” for ineptly imitating Dickens: “If we compare Dickens’s treatment of a similar topic, then the flaws in Leskov’s story become more obvious” 112. The psychological transformation of the “beast” uncle is considered far-fetched and incredible. However, the sequence of events in the story is subject to its own internal – specifically Christmas – logic. The Canadian scientist K. Lantz in his criticism does not capture the nationally original artistic specificity of Leskov’s narrative, but it is evident here. This is not just the ideological and moral atmosphere of the universal Christmas festival glorified by Dickens; These are Russian Christmastides - the embodiment of folk winter “fabulousness” with its traditional amusements, fun with the bear, with the obligatory victory of good over evil, truth over falsehood. “A Feast for the Whole World,” a celebration of human unity, organically connected with folklore tradition, crowns Leskov’s story. Focus on folklore helps Leskov safely avoid sentimentality and didacticism - vices from which even Dickens’s exemplary Christmas stories are not free” 113. “Very great touches” (7, 31) of the story do not spoil it at all, but give credibility to the sudden transformation of “an irritated and angry heart” (7, 42). Developing according to its own laws, including the Christmas motif of the “wonderful,” the story does not contain a single false note. The description of the extraordinary friendship of a serf with a tame bear, whom the enraged master condemned to execution, and then pardoned under the influence of a Christmas sermon, carries another very important idea - the fraternal unity of not only people, but also man and nature, all living, created, existing things. It is not for nothing that Khraposhka and his friend the bear Sganarelle are depicted as somehow surprisingly similar to each other: “Very dexterous, strong and courageous,” “Khraposhka was considered handsome” (7, 28), it is said about the man; almost the same characteristics are present in the description of the beast: “extraordinary strength, beauty and dexterity” (7, 30). In the story, the “scientific” bear performs tricks, walks on its hind legs, helps men carry sacks, and wears a hat with a feather. But not only is the bear a favorite figure in folk amusement and especially in Christmas masquerade. Sganarelle can rightfully be considered one of the main characters of Leskov’s story “The Beast”. The writer reveals a subtle understanding of the character and disposition of the tame bear, and is not afraid to compare it even with the tragic Shakespearean image of “King Lear”. Leskov captures the almost human experiences of a beast doomed to death: “Suffered and exhausted, apparently not so much from physical suffering as from severe moral shock, he strongly resembled King Lear.” “The bear saved this friendly gift and now, when his heart found instant peace in the arms of a friend, as soon as he stood on the ground, he immediately took out the cruelly crumpled hat from under his arm and put it on the top of his head...” (7, 37). This funny headdress is “something like a crown” - like Shakespeare’s “unfortunate crown bearer”. In such a relationship between the natural and the human, as it is presented in Leskov’s story, all living things act as part of the whole, single and indivisible harmonious world of God. Therefore, the little narrator’s question to the nanny is not surprising and logical: “Can’t I pray for Sganarelle? But such a question was above the old woman’s religious considerations <...> however, the bear is also God’s creation, and he swam with Noah in the ark. It seemed to me that the reminder of swimming in the ark seemed to lead to the fact that God’s boundless mercy could be extended not only to people, but also to other God’s creatures, and with childish faith I knelt in my crib and, leaning my face to the pillow, asked the greatness of God not to be offended by my fervent request and to spare Sganarelle” (7, 33). This simple-minded children's prayer, poured out from the heart, can be correlated with the biblical hopes of the Book of the Prophet Isaiah: “Then the wolf will live with the lamb, and the leopard will lie down with the kid; and the calf, and the young lion, and the ox shall be together, and a little child shall lead them” (Isaiah 11:6). “Be like children” - this saying of Christ meant a lot to Leskov. Theologians teach that it is through the infancy of Jesus that the highest wisdom is revealed: “God’s power and God’s wisdom are hidden in the weaknesses of infancy; there is no other door to perfection and blessedness than the infancy of Jesus” 114. It is no coincidence that the image of a child is often depicted in the Yuletide narrative: “It’s so gratifying sometimes to become children again, at least for a while! And this is especially good at Christmas time, when we celebrate the birth of the Divine Child!” – exclaimed the classic of the Christmas story genre, Charles Dickens 115 Thus, the events of Leskov’s story “The Beast” are refracted through the prism of a child’s consciousness. The child - the hero of the Christmas story - is most often disadvantaged, suffering, and unhappy. Classic story by X.-K. Andersen's "The Little Match Girl" about an orphan who freezes on New Year's Eve, gave rise to many imitations. The joyful atmosphere of universal rejoicing is intruded by the motif of suffering, crying, rooted in the Gospel, as the threshold of the “passion of the Lord” that was prepared for Jesus at the end of his earthly journey. It is known that Christ never laughed. On the contrary, He was often seen crying. “The Beast” is one of Leskov’s few “idyllic” Christmas stories. The Christmas ending is traditional and convincingly touching. Leskov appeals to the Christmas chapters of the Gospel, the Supreme Providence enters the scene in the form of “genre axioms” traditional in the Christmas story: miracle, salvation, gift. Moreover, this stable Christmas “triad” is realized here literally: “fate surprisingly patronized Sganarelle and, once intervening in the beast’s business, seemed to want to save him at all costs” (7, 39); the priest “talked about a gift that now, as in “this time,” every poor person can bring the “Born Youth” to the manger, bolder and more worthy than the wise men of antiquity brought gold, myrrh, and frankincense. Our gift is our heart, corrected according to His teaching” (7, 42). People bring gifts to Jesus, but He also promises Christians that “all things will be added to them”: “Seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things will be added to you” (Matthew 6:33). Mutual selfless giving emphasizes the completeness of the harmonious unity between earth and heaven, the physical world and the moral world. Christmas is regarded as the return of a lost paradise to people: “Behold, the tree of life blossomed in the den from the Virgin,” proclaims the church Christmas hymn, “and Her womb appeared to us as a mental paradise with God’s planting; By eating from it, we will not die like Adam, but we will live.” And then one of the most important Christmas ideas is formulated: “Christ is born before the fallen and to restore the image.” In this context, the meaning of the story’s epigraph deepens: “And the beasts listened to the holy word” - we are talking specifically about a bitter person for whom the possibility of salvation is not excluded. An important interpretation of the fact that the Lord became incarnate, humiliating Himself to the smallest, can be heard in the Church’s Teaching for Christmas: “We recline in the manger of beasts, that we may be delivered from bestial life,” that is, Christ, by His birth, delivers humanity from the Fall, from animal, “bestial” life, and bestows spiritual, eternal life. “Pray to the born Christ” (7, 41), calls the village priest. And Christ becomes “the tamer of the beast” (7, 44). The blessed tears of repentance sent down to the “man-beast” are the main miracle of the “Yuletide Transfiguration”: “An amazing thing happened: he cried!” (7, 42). Such an unusual quality of Christmas literature, like the crying and laughter of Christmas, goes back precisely to the Gospel events. This phenomenon is designed to soften hearts of stone, melt icy souls, and call for repentance, mercy, warmth and tears of grace. The human soul is cleansed by repentance and tears. “A soul immobilized by repentance is alien to grace: this is a stop on the way to ascent, “the insensibility of a petrified heart,” a sign of spiritual death,” wrote V.N. Lossky. – Repentance, according to the teachings of St. John Climacus, there is, as it were, renewed baptism, but the “source of tears” after baptism is greater than baptism,” “the gift of tears” is a sure sign that the heart has been melted by divine love. “We will not be accused,” says the same saint, “at the end of our souls for not working miracles, for not theologizing, for not achieving vision, but, without a doubt, we will give an answer to God for not weeping incessantly for our sins.” These tears of grace - the completion of repentance - are at the same time the beginning of endless joy (the antinomy of the beatitudes proclaimed in the Gospel - “Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted”)” 116. Only on this path does the road to salvation and “transfiguration”, to the restoration of the “fallen image”, to the resurrection of “dead souls” open. At the end of the story, the Christmas change of Christmas antinomies takes place: crying is replaced by cheerful laughter, fear - by joyful jubilation, cold - by warming warmth: “here glory was achieved to the Most High God and the world began to smell sweet in the name of Christ, in the place of severe fear, cheerful bonfires were lit, and there was joy in everyone, and they jokingly said to each other: “With us, it didn’t happen that even the beast went to glorify Christ in holy silence” (7, 43). In the metamorphoses of the Christmas finale, one can read the deep meaning of the teachings about “warmth” and “coldness” of the spiritual instructions of St. Seraphim of Sarov, whose image, outlined in the epigraph, illuminates the entire story with inner light: “God is a fire that warms and kindles hearts and wombs. So, if we feel coldness in our hearts, which is from the devil, for the devil is cold, then let us call on the Lord, and He will come and warm our hearts with perfect love not only for Him, but also for our neighbor. And from the face of warmth the coldness of a good-hater will be driven away” 117. Repina T.S. Essay by I.S. Shmelev “The Grace of St. Seraphim": experience of spiritual and physical healing One of the outstanding writers of the 20th century, Ivan Sergeevich Shmelev, like many of his fellow writers, by the will of fate found himself in a distant foreign land - in exile. The one who would later glorify Holy Rus' to the whole world in his best works - “Old Valaam”, “Nanny from Moscow”, “Pilgrim”, “Summer of the Lord”, came to Berlin in November 1922. This eternally sociable, “living” person, according to the recollections of relatives and close friends (Yu.A. Kutyrina, V.N. and I.A. Bunin), looked broken and emotionally devastated. He mourned the death of his only, dearly beloved son (the grief was doubled by the inability to share grief with his family: until the end of his life, Ivan Sergeevich did not inform his wife about the reliable information received from A.B. Lunacharsky about the execution of his son, retaining in her the last hope for a miracle). The writer was oppressed by both the consciousness of the tragedy of his native country and the very necessity of his own departure from the Motherland. Shmelev's general condition at that moment can be defined as a state of deep internal crisis. It should be noted that the spiritual path of I.S. Shmeleva was very difficult. He was born into a truly religious, patriarchal family, where the Gospel was the main book. All of his childhood and youth passed within the strict framework of the Orthodox tradition. During his student years, the worldview of the future writer was intensively formed. However, while studying at the university, Shmelev, like most young people of his age, discovered the full breadth of scientific knowledge and saw the prospects for its development. The result of this was the emergence of doubts about the truth of religious teaching. The young man was at a crossroads: faith in the omnipotence of the Lord God was decreasing, while the idea of ​​a person’s own importance and the abilities of human thought in deciding the destinies of the world grew. Many years later, turning to this difficult period in his life, Shmelev recalled: “I had already staggered from the Church; I was, if not an atheist, then nothing at all. I read with enthusiasm Buckle, Darwin, Sechenov, Letourneau... stacks of brochures from book stalls on Mokhovaya Street, where students demanded “the latest achievements of science.” I had an insatiable thirst to “know.” And I learned a lot, and this knowledge led me away from the most important knowledge - from the Source of Knowledge, from the Church" 118. An intensification of the spiritual crisis occurred in the 1920s, when the remnants of Wrangel’s troops were defeated, when executions without trial or investigation began in the dungeons of the Reds, when people began to lose faith in both God and man. Many years later, having regained the Orthodox truth, in one of his most spiritual works - the story “Kulikovo Field” (1939–1947) - Shmelev identified the error that befell him in his youth. To the hero’s remark, who admitted that he is “of little faith, like everyone else, touched by “knowledge,”” Olga Sredneva reacts as the author himself, already wise with experience, might characterize himself as a young man: “With a little earthly knowledge, and not “knowledge...”,” she corrected with a pitying smile” (2, 153). The end of the 1920s and the beginning of the 1930s were marked in Shmelev’s work by a gradual turn to spiritual themes. The writer’s heart thawed in memories of Russia’s past, because the image of Rus' is inseparable from the luminous face of the Lord. The consequence of this was the appearance in 1927 of the novel “Love Story”, in which the first beginnings of comprehension of the spiritual essence of events and human characters appeared; in 1933 the novel “Nanny from Moscow” was completed. The year 1934 became a truly turning point both in the fate and in the writer’s work. It was then that a short essay “The Grace of Rev. Seraphim,” which tells the story of Shmelev’s miraculous healing from a duodenal ulcer that had tormented him for many years. The best specialists, American and French, after conducting a full examination of the writer’s body, taking twelve x-rays, came to the conclusion that surgery was required. Driven to despair by a long illness, Ivan Sergeevich awaited the resolution of his fate, gloomily anticipating it in his imminent death: “I asked - just cut it quickly, anyway... just hurry. What's next? This “further” no longer existed for me: further is the end, of course. Well, after the operation, months, a year of life: I’m no longer young, I’m so weakened” (2, 340). And then, on the eve of the operation, a miracle happened: in a dream, the writer was shown a sign from Saint Seraphim - his name appeared on the patient’s x-rays - and from that memorable night the pain left the sufferer. Shmelev’s healing from illness was a truly miraculous event: salvation came to him not from the hands of doctors - earthly people, but became a gracious gift from the holy saint of God, St. Seraphim: “St. Seraphim covered everyone... both me and the professor... and there is no us, but only “St. Seraphim" (2, 340). But more than one corruptible body was saved by the saint’s lofty prayers; first of all, they returned the despairing man of little faith back into the fold of spiritual life. The development of two themes - physical and spiritual healing - makes up the plot of the work, its outer and inner border. In the small narrative space of the essay, the writer was able to show the development of the disease, the nature of its course and, in addition, the difficult path of familiarization with the main Orthodox truths, of overcoming a person’s own sinfulness. The composition of the essay includes a beginning, two parts that contrast from each other in the main theme and the general tone of the narrative, and a short ending. The first part of the work is devoted to a story about a serious illness of the body and an equally serious illness of the soul. The author emphasizes that in this episode his consciousness was more occupied by the suffering of the flesh. The disease was truly painful, which is why at the beginning of the story physiological details are laid bare and all medical procedures are described in detail. Everything here is concrete, filled with clear definitions characteristic of earthly life. A gloomy picture is painted that does not give any hope of getting rid of the torment, everything portends inevitable death: “the pain gave shorter and shorter reprieves,” “relief came less and less,” “the “niche” did not give me peace” (2, 338). At the same time, in this part of the work, the narrator denotes the beginning of that spiritual battle from which, thanks to the holy help of St. Seraphim, he emerged victorious. Repeatedly throughout the story, the author called himself a person of little faith. And about his attempts to turn to the Lord for help, he wrote: “Did I pray? Yes, he prayed, of little faith... weakly, unsteadily, without fervor... but he prayed. <...> But what is my prayer! It’s not that I was an unbeliever, no: but I didn’t have strong faith, strong spirituality, I’ll say it with all honesty. I also prayed to the great martyr. Panteleimon, and Rev. Seraphim. I prayed and thought - it’s all over” (2, 340). But then two signs were sent down to him, clearly giving hope for healing: one - during a church service on Holy Saturday (Ivan Sergeevich still came to church, overcoming pain), the other - during confession and communion of the Holy Gifts. Both times the pain subsided. After the high signs, the writer’s ardent desire to live returned, a truly earnest prayer was born, addressed to the monk: “That night I again briefly, but perhaps more fervently than usual, mentally prayed... - precisely, I prayed, as if in despair, the reverend. Seraphim: “You, holy, reverend Seraphim... can!.., I believe that You can!..”” (2, 341). And with the onset of the morning after the significant night, Shmelev woke up as a healthy man. In the second part of the essay, a different tone prevails: feelings of joy, delight and, at the same time, confusion and surprise from a sudden miracle become dominant. The author of the essay repeats the name of the saint in order to fully believe what happened to him. The intervention of the Supreme, the Heavenly in earthly existence led to an inexplicable, indefinable harmony and lightness. Gratitude to the saint sounds in every sentence, in every word. In the second part, the very language of the narrative changes, words of high style appear: “covered,” “looked upon,” “replaced” (2, 344). The return to life of not only the body, but also the soul is shown by the author in several short phrases: “I immediately woke up or came to my senses. There was no pain. There was a calmness in me, as if a weight had been lifted. The operation was no longer scary for me. In a word, I felt better, lighter mentally” (2, 341). In contrast to the first part of the essay, which is devoted to actions and experiences associated with caring for the body, in the second, the awareness of the fact of a miraculous healing that has occurred prevails, the writer’s thought turns to the greatness of the Heavenly Forces, and he rushes into the realm of the spiritual knowledge that has been revealed to him. “Grace of Rev. Seraphim" is a revelation essay of a confessional nature. The writer opened up to the reader a purely personal, intimate, internal sphere: “It was in me, inside me...” (2, 342). He explained his decision to tell the world about his miraculous healing in the beginning of the essay: “An inner voice tells me that I must, must inform those who believe in God and even unbelievers about this, so that even these unbelievers will think about it... Wonderful is the word of Isaiah: “Oh, you who remind us of the Lord! do not be silent! "" (Is. 62:6) (2, 337). Shmelev, who again believed, fulfills the duty of warning the Orthodox from the wrong path. After this, the writer repeatedly included in the fabric of his works moments of the appearance of saints, saints, and righteous people (the plot of the story “Kulikovo Field” is based on this; the action in the novel “Heavenly Paths” takes place on the border between the Heavenly and the earthly). However, we note that of the entire artistic heritage of the author, only a small essay “The Grace of St. Seraphim" has autobiographical features. Shmelev, who had already experienced the grace of the Lord, accurately guessed the highest meaning of the miracle that happened to him: the phenomenon was granted, first of all, to confirm him, a man of little faith, in the faith. After all, according to the narrator himself, all the actions he performed before the operation, associated with church practice, he did “not so much out of a deep spiritual need, but rather according to Orthodox custom” (2, 340). Important in this regard is the motif of miracle, highlighted by the author himself, along with another – the motif of spiritual loneliness. Only after experiencing the healing from his illness granted by Saint Seraphim did Shmelev cease to feel his own isolation from the Orthodox world that was once again close to him. He joyfully realizes: “St. Seraphim! He's here too! I’m not alone at all...” (2, 343). Having acquired true, firm faith, the writer felt involved in a large Orthodox family, joined that single conciliar consciousness that raises a common prayer to the Lord not only during divine services, but at every moment of existence, and began to confess the truth about eternal life and the Kingdom of Heaven. The work confirms one of the postulates of Orthodox doctrine: in unbelief and sin, a Christian is always alone, and loneliness gives rise to fear and despair. Only newfound faith and prayer calm the restless soul and return it to the one Church. In his essay, Shmelev touched on the important topic of confrontation between two worldviews. On the one hand, there is the Orthodox consciousness, capable of accepting a miracle without a doubt and believing in it; on the other hand, there is a rational, practical view of the world that distinguishes Western man. Foreign doctors, the characters in the essay, trust only those results that scientific knowledge gives, while Ivan Sergeevich himself and his wife Olga Aleksandrovna immediately felt something “significant” in the dream they saw (2, 341). An Orthodox person lives in a world where the border between the Heavenly and the earthly is very fluid. The very existence of believers is associated with a conscious or subconscious expectation of a miracle. Orthodox dogma supposedly endows true believers with super vision and super senses that allow them to understand the power of holy Providence. The Venerable Seraphim of Sarov opens up to the soul of the believing author: “And He sees everything, knows everything and directs everything as it should. For He is in a different category, where all our laws are clearer to Him than all the professors, and He has other, higher laws, according to which our laws can be directed in such a way that the “impossible” becomes possible” (2, 344). The writer with spiritual vision catches what is happening in the other world and sincerely believes in it. The American doctor, who is unable to believe in a miracle, exclaims: “I don’t see anything...” (2, 342). His scientific research does not give him an interpretation of what happened, and he does not realize that now that the Monk Seraphim has “covered” everything with his mercy, simple human knowledge cannot explain anything. It is natural for the non-religious heroes of the essay to understand what is happening: none of the world religions knows such a rich history of miraculous healings as Orthodoxy. It should be noted that Shmelev’s figure of the Venerable Seraphim himself does not have the outlines of a specific image. For the writer, he becomes the personification of the heavenly world, that unearthly light that sanctified and warmed his soul. This is joy itself, grace, miracle. On the other hand, the presence of the saint strengthens that indestructible connection with the native land, which the writer treasured so much: “I am not alone, I have kindred spirits here, and He, with me, is also ours, the most Russian, from Sarov, a Kuryan by birth, my refuge is my hope. Here, in this – alien to everything in me – Europe” (2, 343). Although the author does not tell what the ascetic monk became famous for, it is not accidental that the patient received relief from him. The narrative mentions that Shmelev initially addressed both the Great Martyr Panteleimon and the Venerable Seraphim in his prayers. Both of them are known for their miraculous healings. The chronicle says that Saint Seraphim predicted that “after his resurrection he will move from Sarov to Diveevo and there he will open a sermon of worldwide repentance” 119. Shmelev’s prayer was heard by the saint of God because not only the writer’s body sought healing during his illness, but also his soul desired repentance for a lack of faith that was unforgivable for a Christian. Shmelev received an invaluable gift from St. Seraphim of Sarov: the saint instilled in him the most important hope for any believer - hope for salvation in eternal life, giving healing, accepting repentance. Another, no less important reason explaining why miraculous help came to the writer tormented by illness precisely from St. Seraphim of Sarov is the widespread opinion among clergy of the Russian Orthodox Church abroad about the holy patronage of this saint to all emigrants forced to leave the Fatherland at the beginning of the last century and disperse to different parts of the globe. Here is one such testimony: “Reverend Seraphim was a helper to the suffering and a teacher of Orthodoxy in many countries of the universe. If you make a list of parishes, monasteries and chapels created in his name, you will get an impressive list. Of course, the dissemination of information about him was associated with Russian emigrants who fled for the sake of truth to the free world. There they called on him, and he helped them in life’s difficulties and also revealed himself to the heterodox world” 120. The history of emigrant Russia knows many cases of healings similar to the one described in Shmelev’s essay. By helping Russians who found themselves in different parts of the world, as well as by bringing people of other faiths to the Lord, and therefore to the true Church - Orthodoxy, the saint rightfully earned the high title of “Ecumenical Lamp” 121. The mercy of healing shown by the Monk Seraphim of Sarov to the Russian Orthodox writer, like many other believers, deserves special worship, since the saint himself experienced no less pain at that time: the Diveyevo monastery, entrusted to his care by the Mother of God herself, was destroyed and desecrated, and his holy relics were exposed and tormented. The saint's asceticism for the human race knew no bounds even after his death. The Monk Seraphim was close to Shmelev also with his immeasurable love for the Most Pure Mother of God. In obedience, he was given guardianship over the fourth inheritance of the Mother of God on earth. The first was Iveria, a region in Georgia, where the initial copy of the Iveron Icon of the Mother of God was found. But it was this icon that was especially revered in the Shmelevs’ house, which is reliably reflected in the autobiographical novel “The Summer of the Lord.” This fact also appeared as a kind of miracle: as if the Most Pure One herself sent St. Seraphim to save the Russian emigrant. Subsequently, Shmelev repeatedly turned with prayers to Saint Seraphim and regretted only one thing: that he did not have an icon of the saint. But suddenly, soon after recovery, in January 1935, a new miracle: “They sent me an image of St. Seraphim, the abbot sent, with the inscription: “to the writer of Russian piety”... We made an ark with O A and with the help of Ivik, gilded it ourselves, and now our “holy corner” is shining. This work was amazingly joyful! The image was made on St. Athos, presented to some Fr. Parthenia, then lay at night on the stone of St. Seraphim, in Sarov... then he came to Pryashevskaya Rus', and now - the sacred gift - with me, in Boulogne. He will bring us to... Sarov, and so I will go home with him. And it will be, it will be, I want it. And it will be. It “suddenly” manifested itself in me as a clarification” 122. And this prayer of Shmelev was undoubtedly heard by the Lord, the Mother of God and the Monk Seraphim, since the writer, several decades after his death, returned to his native land, rested in it, and his spiritual heritage was united with the common national heritage. After the miraculous healing described in the essay, trying to justify the newly given life and having gained spiritual insight, Shmelev plunges into creativity with a bright feeling of revealed knowledge. No writer began any work without praying to St. Seraphim; he turned to him for help in his writing: “I pray to St. Seraphim: lift up my spirit to worthy work! in the name!..." 123 . And the monk again took the suppliant under his protection. Essay “The Grace of Rev. Seraphim" opened a new stage in the writer's work, a spiritually deeper one, which produced his best works: "At the Elder Barnabas" (1936), "Old Valaam" (1936), "Kulikovo Field" (1939), "Summer of the Lord" (1927–1944). About the main idea of the last novel, the author himself wrote: “In “Heavenly Paths” - to all nature, I would like to sing the glory with the words of my Daria ... - I want to go into our Russian expanses, into the bells of the monastery, into prayers, into winter fields, into the wilderness of the parks of old estates ... into hayfields ... in blizzards, into the economic village life - and permeate everything with the saints, fill it with it, and through it, Darinya, show to the reader the Russian world of God" 124. Modern Russian literary scholars rightly consider “Heavenly Paths” to be “an experience in the spiritual novel” 125. In the depiction of Holy Russia with all its churches, monasteries, saints, saints, the writer saw his creative destiny and followed it until the end of his life. Sokhryakov Yu.I. Decoration of the Russian Land On the centenary of the glorification of the saint of God Seraphim, the Golos-Press publishing house, with the assistance of the charitable foundation “Encyclopedia of Seraphim of Sarov,” published the book “Seraphim of Sarov. A heartfelt word about the great ascetic of the Russian Land.” The book includes everything significant that was written and told in the 19th and 20th centuries about the great spiritual ascetic. Here we will find “The Life of St. Seraphim of Sarov,” written by Archpriest Dimitry Troitsky, the prophecies of the saint and stories about his deeds by Ivan Shmelev, Vasily Rozanov, Dmitry Merezhkovsky. A significant section of the collection entitled “Poetic Wreath to Saint Seraphim” includes poems and poems by Ivan Bunin, Andrei Bely, Maximilian Voloshin and many other famous and unknown poets who sang the bright face and good deeds of the holy elder. In the preface to the book, Alexander Strizhev rightly notes that even before the glorification of the Sarov ascetic, his name as a prayer representative before the throne of the Life-Giving Trinity was widely known in all parts of the Russian Land. The glory of Father Seraphim did not cease as the greatest seer, who predicted many things that came true after his death. This saint of God, according to A.N. Strizhev, “possessed a sensitive eschatological ear: he heard the distant tectonic rumblings of impending changes. And at the same time, he was truly a folk hero, beloved from young to old. People considered him a saint during his lifetime." 126 Of undoubted interest is the article by Mikhail Lodyzhensky, devoted to a comparative analysis of the Catholic saint Francis of Assisi and the great spiritual ascetic of the Russian Land. This article helps to understand more deeply the difference between Catholicism and Orthodoxy, which the wonderful Russian thinker I.A. wrote about in detail in his work “On Orthodoxy and Catholicism”. Ilyin 127. Of no less interest is the article “Leo and Seraphim” by the famous Russian publicist and thinker M.O. Menshikov, shot in 1918 by Jewish security officers near Lake Valdai. Saying that the burial of Pope Leo XII coincided with the discovery of the relics of St. Seraphim of Sarov, Menshikov comes to the conclusion that the West and the East differed in the definition of holiness. The West took a living priest, clothed him in snow-white robes, surrounded him with royal worship, elevated him to the “universal” throne, and called him the most holy and infallible. And in the end, it turned out to be a fiction, because in essence, none of the Catholics, except for dark people, seriously believes in either the throne of the pope, or the tiara, or the keys, or the infallibility of the venerable old man, born a poor Tuscan nobleman, of any number of them. The paths of His Holiness and our saint turned out to be completely different, as were their very appearance and posthumous fate. According to Menshikov, the Russian people honor dead saints as living ones, believing that the truly living is immortal. This is the sense in which the bones of the righteous give life. They are physical evidence of the possibility of a perfect life. Just the thought of such a possibility is a lifesaver. This is what distinguishes St. Seraphim of Sarov from the forgotten Leo XII. But perhaps the most interesting is the appendix, which contains a recording of the conversations of St. Seraphim about the purpose of Christian life, made by his admirer H.A. Motovilov. The acquisition of the Spirit of God, the holy elder said in one of his conversations, is the opposite of the acquisition of material goods: “The acquisition of the Spirit of God is also capital, but grace-filled and eternal.” All this helps to understand the essence of the Russian idea, which St. Seraphim of Sarov expressed extremely laconically: “Acquire a peaceful spirit, and thousands around you will be saved.” The book under review will, without a doubt, be of interest not only to Orthodox Christians, but also to everyone who loves Russia and is interested in its history and spiritual and religious heritage, which has global and universal significance. Spiritual foundations of Russian literature I dedicate it to Mother Valentina Averyanova, the mother of my seven children and many spiritual children. Archpriest Alexy Averyanov. Reflection on the meaning of the Nativity Fast The Nativity fast, starting on November 28, ends on January 7, the feast of the Nativity of Christ. The ancient establishment of the Nativity Fast was legalized at the Council of 1166 under the Byzantine Emperor Manuel and Patriarch Luke of Constantinople; The duration of the fast was also determined - 40 days. The Nativity Fast aims to prepare the human spirit to comprehend the Great Mystery of the Coming of God into the world of people, into human history. The Nativity Feast itself begins on November 27, the day of memory of the Apostle Philip; On this day, as well as on Monday, Wednesday and Friday throughout Lent, Orthodox Christians abstain from wine and oil and do not eat fish. Fish is eaten on Tuesday, Thursday, Saturday and Sunday, but from January 2 until the Feast of the Nativity of Christ we also fast from fish. By fasting, a person works on his character and, ceasing hostility with the outside world, rises to an understanding of the symbolic meaning of food. Thus, on Christmas Eve, people faithful to Christ are offered a special dish - sochivo (hence the name of the day), in Greek kolivo, cooked from wheat with apples, prunes, raisins and seasoned with honey. Wheat symbolizes our faith in life after death in the Heavenly Mansions; A grain of wheat denotes the essence of man: being thrown into the ground, it, decaying, raises its ear to the sun. The presence of honey expresses the hope of the righteous to receive, for the bitterness of the earthly journey following the Truth of the Gospel, the sweetness of the bliss of the kingdom of Christ in Heavenly Jerusalem, where there is no sorrow, illness, but endless life. The addition of fruits signifies the love of the human soul faithful to God for the Creator of the Heavenly Garden, eternal fruitfulness in the Holy Spirit. During the days of the Nativity Fast, the human soul, putting aside carnal wisdom, through faith, hope and love learns the art of maintaining the balance of conscience, that is, living in wise reverence for everything that exists, ascends to that state of spirit from which comprehension of the Truth is possible. Only a reverent heart can freely answer the eternal question in every generation of people: “What is Truth?” Truth is the mystery of the incarnation of the Lord Jesus Christ, who came into the dimension of human nature to crush the power of sin, death and hell, to create a New Heaven and a New Earth, and to transform humanity. To comprehend the real path of following the Truth, it is necessary to acquire internal spiritual vision as a method of higher knowledge, for the beginning of feeling is piety in God. Just as a small lamp, when formed into a beam, reaches into the distance, so spiritual vision is preceded by the ability to remain silent. Silence is the guiding light of the soul. Silence at the table satiates a person with moderate amounts of food; on the contrary, verbosity at the table makes you feel hungry even if there is enough food. Silence at the table gives rise to a feeling of gratitude to God, which saturates the soul and gives peace. “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.” After being expelled from Paradise, our forefather Adam and our forefather Eve ate grains of cereals, watering them with tears, in constant lamentation. Talking at the table creates vanity in the soul, that is, various worries, a person loses the feeling of God, the presence of the Spirit of God. The Lord says: “I will look only to the silent and humble in heart.” Through the silence of a humble heart, a person understands that near him the Spirit of God is building the Ark of Salvation - the Church of Christ - for his faithful and wise children. This knowledge is the main meaning of fasting. True fasting gives rise to the will in a person’s heart to ascend into this Ark of salvation from the rising waters of sin and the sea of ​​life. Vanity and disregard for the Word of God are qualities common to modern people and antediluvian humanity. Before the flood, people listened to the preaching of repentance by righteous Noah for 17 years, looked at the construction of the ark of salvation for 103 years, but turned to even worse sins and, hardened against the Word of Truth, among 7,000 people went to burn the ark and kill righteous Noah. During this campaign, the flood began against the righteous man. The number of destroyers - 7000 - symbolizes the 7 deadly sins multiplied without number, which led to the extreme selfish bitterness of people, the loss of the path of life and the death of an ancient civilization in the waters of the flood. Fasting is accompanied by a rethinking of the inner life of the heart; fasting without repentance from sins is only physiological catharsis - it does not bring purification and profit to the soul. If someone has committed a violation of fasting, then let him take as an example the Monk Macarius the Great, who, for a glass of wine drunk for the sake of the visiting brethren, did not drink water for the whole day. There is such an episode in the memoirs of Hieroschemamonk Sampson (Sievers). The carriage with political prisoners was “forgotten” on a siding for several days without food or water. People died from panic on the second day. The practice of fasting and the skill of prayer allowed Father Sampson not to lose his presence of mind and to survive as one of the few. As I already said, fasting without repentance is meaningless. During the Nativity Fast, I recommend that everyone remember all their sins from the age of 7 or from baptism and bring them to their confessor. I will give you an ancient monastic parable about repentance. Two monks meet. One goes to give his clothes for ablution, and the other dissuades him, convincing him that modern washers do not have quality in their work, they get dirty more than they wash, and so on. But the seeker of cleanliness did not listen to discussions about the unworthiness of the brothers washing their clothes, he went and washed his vestments. Remember that we come to the church of God not to man, but to Christ, Who expects true repentance from us. Our forefather Adam, through the taste of sin, lost his spiritual sight and reason and blamed God for his fall; so did our foremother Eve, for she laid the blame on the serpent and neglected repentance. Cain was conceived by unrepentant forefathers and became the first murderer on earth. Abel was conceived in repentance and became righteous. A striking example is from the life of St. Theophilus of Kyiv. A young woman approaches him for a blessing, for the time is approaching to give birth to her child, but the monk menacingly tells her: “You killed the child who was supposed to be born to you first and become a bishop, and this one will be a robber.” But even more striking in this sense is the life story of Judas Iscariot. Judas was born in Iscaria. His father Rovel was once awakened by the cry of his wife, who had a terrible dream that she would give birth to a boy who would become the destroyer of the Jewish race. That same night she conceived, without heeding the warning from God, without producing the fruit of repentance, and gave birth to a son. But the parents’ anxiety grew along with the baby, and they, having tarred the box, threw their son in it into Lake Gennesaret. Opposite Iscaria there is a small island where sheep shepherds lived; they took the box out of the water and gave the baby to the nurse, who gave him the name Judas. When the child grew up, the shepherds brought him to the village of Iskaria, where Rovel adopted him, not knowing that the child was his son. Rovel and his wife gave birth to another son, and Judah began to fear losing his “adopted” father’s inheritance. He took the boy away and killed him with a blow to the head with a stone, and he himself fled to the island where he spent his infancy. Judas was received into the house of a certain Greek and entered into an adulterous relationship with the wife of the owner's son. And when the pregnancy of a young woman was revealed, he killed her husband, who had returned from a trading trip, arranging his fall from the roof of the house. Again Judas fled for fear that his crimes would be revealed. This time - to Jerusalem, where he was accepted as a servant into the palace of King Herod the Elder, thanks to his attractive appearance and helpfulness. He made a career in the palace to become a manager and purchased everything needed for the king. Judas's parents, not knowing that he had killed their youngest son, were very sad and, when unrest in public life began in Iscaria, they moved to Jerusalem. There Rovel bought a house with a garden adjacent to the garden of King Herod. Judas once saw rare flowers in Rovel’s garden, went and picked them, but on his way out he met his father, who began to denounce him and tried to take the flowers away. Proud Judas took the stone and killed Rovel, his father. He brought flowers to Herod and said that Rovel had insulted the Majesty of Herod and him, Judas, for which he killed him. King Herod, by law, forced Judas to marry the wife of Rovel, who he killed, that is, his mother. After some time, the mother recognized Judas as her son. Then Judas, with the intention of repenting, came to Christ, became the treasurer of the Apostolic Brotherhood and began secretly sending money from the treasury to his mother. This theft led him to the betrayal of the Lord Jesus Christ and the rope on an aspen branch. But even while on the Cross, Christ looked for Judas with his eyes, expecting his repentance, for from Judas began the tragic struggle of the Jewish race to collect capital and usury, which in the end will lead the world to bitterness and destruction. From Judas’s former relationship with a Greek woman, a boy was born who became a robber and was crucified to the left of Christ. And during the flight to Egypt, the Mother of God with the Child of God stayed in a certain house where the hospitable hosts, leaving their child, served the fugitives from Bethlehem. The owners’ child cried unattended, and the Mother of God fed him with Her milk and calmed him down. But life without repentance and pious upbringing led him to a gang of robbers, where the chieftain was the son of Judas from a Greek woman. For 12 years, a gang of robbers annoyed travelers, but by order of Herod they were found and captured. So, at the right hand of Christ, his once foster brother, and now a robber, became. Christ from the Cross saw the repentant thief and accepted his repentance: “Today you will be with Me in Paradise.” Another robber saw his father Judas hanged from an aspen tree and reviled the Lord. What kind of robber will humanity be like, who mercilessly shed blood throughout the 20th century? A prudent robber or a mad robber? Only on comprehending the mystery of the repentant element of the human heart, on the new determination to wander through one’s own soul under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, will the plan of people’s lives in the 21st century, the third millennium of Christian civilization, depend. Gladilin M.S. Church of the Life-Giving Trinity in Vyazemy There is a special, inexhaustible talent among the Russian people for centuries for architectural creativity, for the construction and decoration of churches, as “measure and beauty” will say. And there are not so many of them, ancient churches that have reached us in their original form and live next to us. Not many witnesses of our ancient life have survived on Moscow soil. One of them stands forty miles from the Kremlin on the Mozhaisk road, in the village of Vyazemy, in the former estate of the Tsar of Moscow Boris Godunov. While still a boyar, the brother-in-law of Tsar Fyodor Ioannovich looked at and bought profitable land near the village of “Vyazemy Nikolskoe also”, where the “Ostanoshny Yam” was located - the Yamskaya station, where travelers and foreign ambassadors from the West made their last stop before Moscow. And on his estate, Boris Fedorovich, who built and erected a lot - on the bell tower of Ivan the Great in the Kremlin at the very top and now we read the name of Godunov, the final organizer of the main “vertical” of the city of Moscow - built a majestic church near the pond, half made of white stone, which took over the structure and novelty from the Kremlin Archangel Cathedral in the name of the Life-Giving Trinity. Two-tiered (summer and winter church), on a high basement, with a walkway and “seven tops” (five domes of the main church and two at the symmetrical side chapels), it was visible to travelers from everywhere and from afar, attracting their gaze. A separate brick belfry is very original, in the style and taste of the ancient Pskov belfries - two tiers, three-span, with wooden peaked hipped tops. Inside, the church was decorated by Kremlin craftsmen with paintings, icons, and precious utensils for church service. Wall painting was painted using a combined technique: on wet and dry plaster, which made it possible to achieve greater color picturesqueness, but such a technique and decades of our neglect led to excessive shedding of the paint layer and unsatisfactory preservation 128 . The family of Boris Godunov erected Trinity churches; they especially revered the icons and feasts of the Trinity (there is a gold setting for the icon of the famous and “smart” icon painter Andrei Rublev, Godunov’s contribution to the Sergius Monastery, “the house of the Holy Trinity”). According to the canon, the program for painting the church in Vyazemy included images in the upper part, in the domes and vaults - “heaven”: God the Father of Hosts, God the Son Jesus Christ, Christ the Child Emmanuel and the Mother of God, along with the days of God’s creation 129. The scenes of “The Creation of the World” are directly related to the words of Basil the Great in his interpretation on the Sixth Day: “The world is a work of art, subject to contemplation by everyone, so that through it the wisdom of its Creator is known” 130. The archangels are represented in the windows of the drums of the church, and the apostles “from among the seventy” look down from the arches of the vaults. On the pillars supporting the “vault of heaven,” saints, hierarchs, warriors, organizers and defenders of Christ’s faith and the Church are depicted full-length and frontally. Among them are those saints named after Boris Godunov and his relatives, who were revered as their patrons. And on the walls, in the “earthly” part of the church, in three tiers, there is a narrative “The Acts of the Trinity” about the arrival and miraculous prophecy of three angelic travelers from the Old Testament to the righteous Abraham and Lot. The general coloring of the painting was joyful and iridescent, including the primary colors: yellow, red-blue and green on an azure background. “Warm” and “cold” tones, a uniform combination of scenes in tiers, monumental and intense figures of the Grozny style against the backdrop of expressive architecture - everything was harmoniously combined and made up a single symphony. The church and the entire patrimony of Godunov were destroyed during the years of unrest at the beginning of the 16th century, when Polish and Lithuanian detachments, time after time marching on Moscow, stopped in Vyazemy. The church preserved inside on its walls along the entire perimeter, at the level of human height, inscriptions scratched with sharp weapons: foreign soldiers left their names, wrote the year and place from which they came 131. Perhaps in a foreign country they wanted to protect themselves from death and hoped to return home safely. In the spring of 1606, Marina Mnishek was camping in Vyazemy, taking a break from the fast journey, she was in a hurry to Moscow to become the Moscow queen. The young impostor False Dmitry I himself visited here, in his royal estate, enjoying the winter fun of the snow fortress. The impostor's guards, German soldiers and the local population played together, and the people's game turned into a real massacre with fights and blood. According to a contemporary, after the Time of Troubles, Godunov’s estate was a cemetery everywhere with many graves and crosses. Only by the last quarter of the 17th century the village and the church began to be revived. The church was renovated with the efforts and labors of the Moscow royal isographers of the Armory Chamber and the famous icon painter Simon Ushakov, the iconostasis was re-arranged (currently the icons are divided into two parts and are located in the State Tretyakov Gallery and the Novodevichy Convent Museum). This happened after the young Tsar Peter Alekseevich gave Vyazemy to his teacher, uncle Boris Alekseevich Golitsyn, for his help and decisive actions in a clash with his sister and the then ruler Sophia. The Golitsyn princes, valuing the royal gift, owned Vyazemy until the revolution, until the very end of noble autocratic Russia. In the 18th century, the church was reconsecrated in the name of the Transfiguration of the Savior, surrounded by a beautiful arched brick fence, a wonderful architectural and park ensemble appeared nearby in the style of early classicism, the owner of which Nikolai Mikhailovich Golitsyn was a true educator and citizen, he built houses for his peasants, collected an art collection and an extensive library. Moscow University professor Stepan Petrovich Shevyrev came here to study it (after the revolution, the items that were still saved, and 30 thousand books were sent to Moscow and distributed to libraries and museums) 132. Perhaps books from this library were read by little Pushkin, who lived just two miles from Vyazem in the village of Zakharovo, with his grandmother Marya Alekseevna Hannibal. The Pushkin family often visited the Vyazma Church of the Transfiguration. Near the altar, near the fence, under a large old spreading linden tree there is the grave and tombstone of Nikolenka Pushkin, the poet’s brother; The twentieth century did not preserve all other monuments. The church in the former estate of Boris Godunov, the Savvino-Storozhevsky Monastery in Zvenigorod, from early childhood, revealed to the quick-eyed boy quick to read French books the ancient fatherly idea of ​​beauty and national dignity. During the time of the formidable and heroic struggle against the armies of Napoleon, after the Battle of Borodino, retreating to Moscow, Mikhail Illarionovich Kutuzov stopped in Vyazemy. Two brothers, two generals, princes Boris and Dmitry Golitsyn, brilliantly educated and brave officers, owners of the village of Vyazemy, took part in the battle of Borodino. The elder brother studied literature and was among the founders of the famous society “Conversation of Lovers of the Russian Word.” Boris Vladimirovich died from his wound in the Battle of Borodino and was buried in the Vyazma church, as people said, “standing, not wanting to lie still while the enemy tramples our land.” His tombstone in the form of a stele, with a bas-relief and military attributes, is currently located in the Donskoy Monastery. The younger brother served as Moscow governor-general for more than twenty years, leaving behind the memory of a noble and caring boss. Under the French, the church and the estate were subjected to further plunder, but in the 1840s the church was renovated and expanded with a bypass gallery, and a three-tiered bell tower was built nearby. In the second half of the 19th century, society became increasingly interested in native history and national art. Academician V.V. Suslov studied architecture and made drawings of the Vyazemsky Church 133, the Moscow archaeographic commission made recommendations for the restoration of icons, and the then owner Dmitry Borisovich Golitsyn, head of the Imperial Hunt for Tsar Nicholas II and honorary trustee of the Historical Museum, carried out this work. The fate of the church, like many, many others, after the revolution is both sad and deplorable: in the early 1920s, the icons were taken to Moscow, in the 1930s the church was closed, and it housed a library, warehouse, and canteen (holes similar to bullet holes were found on the walls: one of the resting flight commanders set up a shooting range here). In the 1950s, they finally began restoration: they strengthened the belfry, which had begun to tilt, dismantled the bell tower, emptied the galleries, and returned the beautiful decorative kokoshniks to the completion of the church. The restoration of the wall paintings took a long and painful time and was never completed. During this time, some images were defaced with children's scrawled inscriptions, and some faces were carefully cut out and disappeared without a trace. But for ten years now the church has been returned to the Church, and in 2002, with the help of the district administration, the original Sunday school building was built nearby. One of the first events noted in it was the day of memory of Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin, held jointly by the church community, the poet’s museum-reserve and several schools in the area. And may our life again “one and inseparably” rise and flourish here, as before, overshadowed by the ringing of the bells of the Church of the Life-Giving Trinity. Shmeleva A.V. Chronicler of troubled times. A.C. Pushkin about the historical destinies of Russia and will lead her through suffering The tragedy of A.C. Pushkin’s “Boris Godunov” is an inexhaustible source of the innermost thoughts of many generations. The poet’s work seems to reveal the formula of Russian unrest. The moral code of the all-class Russian society he defined is ideally projected onto any historical time. In the year of the 2000th anniversary of the Nativity of Christ, the Russian Orthodox Church canonized a whole host of Russian new martyrs and confessors who showed their service in the difficult 20th century. This greatest event was naturally reflected in iconography. “The Church Triumphant and the Church Militant” is the icon before which Russia bowed in prayerful repentance. In the rays of glory of Christian triumph, Pushkin’s masterpiece, whose providential word has historical epochal significance, is also read in a special way. At the anniversary Council of Bishops, the royal family of Nicholas II was canonized as saints, whose martyrdom and glory were prophesied by Emperor Paul I and the spirit-bearing ascetics: Elder Abel, St. Seraphim, Righteous John of Kronstadt, Blessed Paraskeva... During the 20 years of the reign of Emperor Nicholas II, more saints were canonized than in the entire 19th century. The Monk Seraphim, the Sarov wonderworker, was glorified solely by the will of Nicholas II: when the Holy Synod rejected the question of canonizing the elder, the emperor wrote: “Glorify immediately,” and in 1903, according to the prescient word of the Monk Seraphim, at the site of his exploits in the Sarov Hermitage and Diveyevo, “in the middle of the summer they sang Easter.” And in 2000, another word of the All-Russian priest came true: the Tsar was canonized as a saint - and not a single saint knew such passionate polemics on canonization as the last “retainer” from the House of Romanov. The reign of Emperor Nikolai Alexandrovich saw the collapse of the kingdom-empire and turmoil. In Siberian imprisonment, the royal sufferers retained faith, hope, and love. They were warmed by prayer. In one of the empress’s letters the name of a saint is found, in whose prayers she found consolation (A.A. Vyrubova from Tobolsk, January 9, 1918: “On the 2nd I thought a lot about you, I lit a candle in front of the image of St. Seraphim”) 134. Following modern historians of B.C. Nepomniachtchi drew a parallel between the 17th century and 1917 135. The historical details of the turmoil coincided, history repeated itself. “May the descendants of the Orthodox / Native Land know the past fate...” - the elder of the Chudov Monastery, Pushkin’s Pimen, leaves his many years of work, the chronicle of unrest, to the Orthodox people, hoping that those enlightened by Christ’s baptism are able to comprehend on a spiritual level the circular course of history, like the ancient Russian scribes who saw a mirror reflection of Old Testament events in the fate of the young Christian state, to draw wisdom from history fathers, in order to wisely avoid deceptions, enticements, and temptations. In the silence of Mikhailovsky, under the omophorion of Svyatogorye, Pushkin deduced the historical formula for the existence of the Russian Land. Already from the time of princes Rurik 136, Askold and Dir, Russia, and then Holy Rus', was purposefully formed into a power, a conciliar power. At all times, the Church has nourished the consciousness of Russian people. At the beginning of the 19th century, Russia, despite the strengthening of Masonic sentiments and Catholic influence, was held together by national feeling and the prayer of its ancestors. Pushkin has a special place in the religious and philosophical heritage. Having synthesized the experience of the past, he largely predetermined the development of scientific thought and gave a mystical overview of the fate of his native land. In “Boris Godunov,” his “favorite brainchild,” the poet, who until recently was considered unreliable, like a resurrected chronicler, appears as a providential and geopolitician, an exponent of the national ideals of the fatherland. In Mikhailovsky, the spiritual world of the poet was renewed, who vividly wrote the past fate of his native land. The poet-statist, poet-chronicler and poet-prophet is hidden behind the lines of Mikhailovsky’s masterpiece. “To the memory of Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin, precious to the Russian people, this work is inspired by his genius...” - the character of “Boris Godunov” is stated already in the dedication and in the original title of the tragedy. The poet quite confidently called Karamzin “the last chronicler.” But apparently Rus' was not waiting for the most respected historiographer on the eve of the internal state upheaval of 1825. The last “chronicler” was he, Pushkin. Let the book tradition turn out to be interrupted (precisely in the era described by the playwright), but isn’t it the author of the famous “The Tale of Igor’s Host...” with his fateful appeal lives in Pushkin’s text, isn’t it the chronicler Nestor who calls on the “descendants of the Orthodox” to think about the future - imperishable, isn’t Metropolitan Hilarion giving an image of the standing in the faith of the Russian Land, ordained by God, or, perhaps, himself Grand Duke Vladimir Monomakh is in a hurry to teach the cherished teaching to his descendants?.. The seven-hundred-year wisdom of Slavic existence is reflected in Pushkin’s word. “The religiosity of our literature is not manifested in a simple connection with church life, nor in exclusive attention to the subjects of Holy Scripture. The main thing: Russian writers looked at life events, characters and aspirations of people, illuminating them with the light of the Gospel truth, thinking in the categories of Orthodoxy, and this was manifested not only in direct journalistic statements, but also in the system of artistic images. <...> The main theme of Russian literature is the confrontation between two aspirations that tear apart the soul and heart of a person: for heavenly treasures and earthly treasures” 137. The theme of good and evil arose not without reason in Russian books and fiction. After the adoption of Christianity, the renewed ancient Russian land especially felt the line between good and evil principles. Slavic writing captured its path: it was only about “heavenly treasures,” and this was seen as the goal of man on earth - to inherit the Heavenly Kingdom. This path lay through overcoming the evil that nests primarily in the human heart. The Monk Seraphim more than once taught those who came to him to acquire a “peaceful spirit” - and then thousands around would be saved. The construction and establishment of a Christian state constantly led to the activation of ungodly forces; not without their help, a shift in the concepts of good and evil, truth and lies occurred in the Russian consciousness. According to the calculations of civil and church historians, since 1054 Rus' has hardly lived a single year without internal or external clashes. According to Metropolitan John (Snychev), “from this moment the ongoing war against Russia began” 138. F.M. Dostoevsky noted: “The Russian people are all in Orthodoxy and its idea. There is nothing more in him and he has nothing more - and there is no need, because Orthodoxy is everything. He who does not understand Orthodoxy will never understand anything about the people. Moreover, he cannot even love the Russian people, but will love them only as he would like to see them” 139. There were many significant events in Pushkin's life. The magazine “Helmsman” for 1892 cites the case of young Pushkin and Count Lansky, to whom a mysterious guest appeared and enlightened them about religion. Amazing facts reported by A.P. Arapova, daughter of H.H. Goncharova from her second marriage (with P.P. Lansky). Let us refer to one of them: in the apartment of V.A. Zhukovsky, in Tsarskoe Selo, Pushkin was the only one present, including P.A. Vyazemsky, did not share the general joy on the occasion of Zhukovsky receiving from his royal pupil - the heir to the throne, Grand Duke Alexander Nikolaevich - his “artistically executed marble bust”. The poet amazed everyone with his words, which later became prophetic: “What a wonderful, loving heart! What noble aspirations! I see a glorious reign, great deeds and - God! - what a terrible ending! Up to your knees in blood! - and somehow involuntarily he repeated these last words" 140. What is this if not the providence of historical fate, but the fate of the Tsar becomes the fate of Russia. MM. Dunaev assessed Pushkin’s work in the following way: “The time when Pushkin first truly realized his prophetic ministry in literature can be precisely named: this is the time of the creation of the tragedy “Boris Godunov” - from November 1824 to November 1825,” when the poet “first revealed himself as a literary genius on a global scale” 141. A year later, Pushkin would write in his note “On Public Education”: “Russia is too little known to Russians” 142. The playwright himself intensively and painstakingly studies the era of Tsar Boris, he is interested in the mechanisms of unrest and rebellion. The temptation of a false word is something that has a deep mystical meaning. The scene of the “Chamber of the Patriarch” testifies to the spiritual background of the phenomenon of imposture: the abbot of the Chudov Monastery reports about the fugitive Gregory: “From the Otrepiev family, Galician boyar children. When he was young, he took monastic vows in an unknown place, lived in Suzdal, in the Evfimyevsky Monastery, left there, wandered around different monasteries, and finally came to my miracle brethren” 143. Patriarch Job spiritually sees the light of the fugitive monk: “Oh, he is a vessel of the devil! What a heresy! Catch the enemy! 144. The appearance of the false Tsar in the Russian consciousness was marked by the prototype of the false Messiah, the Antichrist. Academician A.M. Panchenko considered changing his name as werewolf. A Christian who despises the guardian angel given at holy baptism becomes vulnerable and serves as an instrument of dark, demonic forces 145. Pushkin’s False Dmitry admits: “Under the hood, I thought about my brave plan, prepared a miracle for the world - / And finally fled from my cell...”; “I am the culprit; overwhelmed by pride, / I deceived God and kings, / I lied to the world...” 146. This lie will bear fruit. Excited by boyar intrigues, the Russian people dared to control their own destiny, neglecting the oath given to them, and perjury leads to apostasy. Reading the text of Pushkin’s tragedy, you involuntarily notice that the reader believes the words of all the characters (the crafty Shuisky, the evil Vorotynsky, the traitor Kurbsky, the rebellious Pushkin, the traitorous Cossacks, False Dmitry), but not the tsar himself. Pushkinsky Boris complains a lot about unfair reproaches (scene “The Royal Chambers”): “Living power is hateful for the mob”; “They were furious and cursed me!” 147. At the beginning of the 20th century, the Russian people again allowed the royal family to be “furiously cursed” by the “greedy crowd standing at the throne.” Letters from the royal family from captivity discreetly characterize the betrayals of their once subjects. Empress Alexandra Feodorovna boldly wrote to close friends, in particular A.B. Syroboyarsky from Tsarskoe Selo: “You are talking about history. Yes, all this has happened before and will happen again, everything is repeated, but sometimes the Lord God saves people in other ways. You know, I almost don’t believe in people. People have gotten worse. Sodom and Gomorrah in the capital, and at the front? 148; in another letter: “uncultured savage people” 149. MM. Syroboyarskaya from Tobolsk: “Oh, people, people! Small rags. Without character, without love for the Motherland, for God. That is why He punishes the country” 150; “all of Russia is suffering from the influence of evil, the “demon,” in other words, he has confused the minds, tempted the lost” 151. The emperor, distinguished by his restraint, wrote to his sister, Grand Duchess Ksenia Alexandrovna: “Poor, confused people” 152. History repeated itself. “The past is connected with the present by a continuous chain of events flowing from one another” 153. The fate of the Russian Land on the pages of Pushkin’s tragedy is not decided according to human understanding. The people solemnly march from the walls of the ancient Kremlin to the Novodevichy Convent with the icons of Vladimir and Don - “holy banners of the fatherland” (N.M. Karamzin) - to pray to Boris to accept the royal crown. Boris's stubbornness was broken - he could not resist the face of the Most Pure One. “The fervent prayer of the Orthodox has reached heaven” 154. But human self-will is revealed in the mouths of the boyars from the first scene. Shuisky to Vorotynsky: “Let’s skillfully excite the people, / Let them leave Godunov” 155. The Vatican prelates want the same thing. Marina to False Dmitry: “Until Godunov is overthrown by you, / I will not listen to speeches of love” 156. The fruits of “excitement” are disbelief in God’s Providence about the fate of the state. But what about the king, who is refused to rely even on the prayers of his subjects? Pushkin's Boris behaves with royal dignity, as if through centuries he heard the voice of Elder Seraphim: “Bear in silence when the enemy insults you, and open your heart to the only God” 157. Blessed Nikolka symbolically showed the attitude of the people towards Boris. The words of the Church Fathers are timeless. Saint John Chrysostom: “The greatest struggle is slander, especially when it is accompanied by accusations in an important matter. If there is a great struggle, then it is clear that a brilliant crown is prepared for it” 158. Historical time in the tragedy “Boris Godunov” is associated with Russian ideology. Pushkin seems to bring the reader closer to unraveling the secrets of eras that go back centuries. His Boris is a strong personality, but the people “abandoned Godunov,” as they always abandoned their breadwinners during riots and unrest. However, at the end of the tragedy, he is “silent in horror”, “silent” - royal blood has been shed again, and the people’s blood will inevitably follow it. And this silence should be considered as conciliar, as a return from a God-fighting people to a God-bearing people. For the modern reader, the figurative meaning of Pushkin’s tragedy “Boris Godunov” seems to erase the boundaries of time, revealing the historical vicissitudes of the distant past. Before your eyes, as if in reality, the invisible adventurous threads of the “dealers” of history are resurrected along with artistic paintings and scenes. Within the framework of the plot, penetrate into the spirit of the time, feel the hidden meaning of what is happening - isn’t this the genius of the author? And how can we not remember here the stichera to All Saints, who shone in the Russian Land: “Holy Rus', keep the Orthodox faith - / In it is your affirmation.” It contains admonition for us too. Fedoseeva E.N. “Space of another being” in the lyrics of A.S. Pushkina, E.A. Boratynsky and P.A. Vyazemsky It is hardly possible to name a single poet of the 19th century who avoided issues of faith in his work. Sooner or later, on the path of a person’s mental wanderings, a moment of religious awakening overtakes him, and his gaze turns to God, asking Him for spiritual strength, wisdom, love, and a clear, truthful word. This is a time of concentration, conversation with the inner self, searching for answers to unresolved questions. Pushkin’s poem “Another high, important song...” (1829) is a rough draft translation of the beginning of the “Hymn to the Penates” by the English poet R. Southey. It talks about moving away from the temptations of impossible happiness among people into the space of the personal “I”, the boundaries of which are guarded by the house. Pushkin's appeal to this topic reflects the true affections of the poet, shows what occupies the first step on the scale of values ​​for him during this period. A conversation alone with oneself is impossible without invisibly present interlocutors, observing from a “spiritual height”, in this case, household deities to whom Pushkin confesses his “uncooled” love. The libations that are brought to the altar of sacrifice to these deities are called “quiet,” that is, emphatically personal, removed from prying eyes. “Uncooled love” for the penates warms the soul of a person cut off from them. Penetration into the most hidden corners of one’s heart gives knowledge of the depth of the inner “I” in “its powers and weaknesses.” A conversation of this kind requires honesty and impartiality in assessing one’s personality. Household deities are judges and plaintiffs; it is them that Pushkin invites to witness conversations with his own “I.” They teach the science of “honoring yourself,” that is, loving the divine principle in yourself, maintaining dignity, and being true to your destiny. At such moments, the human soul seems to begin the sacrament, which explains the “holy excitement” that accompanies the lyrical hero’s decision to retire far from the “human tribe”: So, I loved you for a long time! I'm calling you As a witness, with what holy excitement In order to guard your solitary fire, “Another high, important song...”, 1829. (II, 474) 159 Man’s temporary shelter on earth is doomed to disappear, but “non-mortal, mysterious feelings” invested in the souls of people are able to preserve in memory the spiritual image of the house as an imperishable shrine. Pushkin dedicates his last “votive hymn” to the Penates. This is the last sound his lyre will make before falling silent forever. Hanging on the pillars of a “ruined sanctuary,” the lyre makes a “sad sound” when the wind touches its strings. Perhaps we are talking about those moral foundations that are laid in the house and are also subject to fluctuations under the breath of everyday storms. Pushkin appreciates the fact that peace reigns in his soul at home. A home is something that gives strength, a reliable, “safe shelter.” Boratynsky in “Stanzas” (1827) also mourns the imperfection of the nature of the “human tribe,” therefore, “wandering around the world,” he finds refuge under the “canopy of a protective shelter.” The poet refers to the “native steppes” - “my initial love.” The feeling of love for one's home begins and ends a person's life. Boratynsky returns to his “native abode” not alone. He is accompanied by a young wife with a “quiet baby in her arms.” In her he sees his support and consolation. The “consonant prayers” of two people connected by love are more likely to reach the ears of the Almighty. For Pushkin, the awakening of his inner conscience occurs at twilight or at night. The night leaves the hero alone with his inner self. This is a dialogue between the former self and the present self. An example of such a dialogue is in the poem “When the noisy day falls silent for a mortal...” (1828). What for a mortal is relaxation and a “reward” for the day’s work, for Pushkin’s lyrical “I” is a painful self-destruction. Unlike Boratynsky and Vyazemsky, Pushkin is afraid of night visions. Night for him is a time of revelation not so much of metaphysical truth as of the guilt actually present in his life. When the sounds of a busy day fade away, in the silence of the night the condemning inner voice is most clearly heard. The inner enlightenment that accompanies the night visions of Vyazemsky and Boratynsky is difficult for Pushkin, who suffers from the burning of spiritual fire: “In the inaction of the night, the serpents of heartfelt remorse burn alive within me” (II, 137). If for Vyazemsky and Boratynsky the limits of earthly life are too narrow, and the beyond world is limitless, then that new countdown of time, deliberately slowed down, which begins with the arrival of night for Pushkin, is also characterized by a narrowing of space. In the description of the internal state of the lyrical hero, attention is focused on cramped conditions, oppression, and spiritual discomfort: the mind is “suppressed by melancholy,” it is “crowded with an excess of heavy thoughts.” Guilt does not need proof: memory “silently develops a scroll” (my italics - E.F.). Reading the chronicle of your life with “spiritual eyes” gives rise to repentant feelings. “It is not difficult to despise – braver – the judgment of people; it is impossible to despise one’s own court,” Pushkin wrote in a letter to Vyazemsky back in 1825 (IX, 203). All the old pain and mental anguish of the poet come to life in this poem. A special look is taken at the past; it is assessed from present positions. But despite the severe condemnation to which the spiritual “I” subjects the physical “I,” Pushkin does not want everything sad, difficult, even shameful, to disappear from his life and memory: And reading my life with disgust, And I complain bitterly, and I shed bitter tears, But I don’t wash away the sad lines. (II, 137) The past years have been years of not only losses, but also gains. If a person is able to look at his life with different eyes, then this testifies to his moral maturation and spiritual improvement. In “Poems Composed at Night During Insomnia” (1830), Pushkin seems to continue a conversation with voices from another world. Mystical images are again characterized from the point of view of the real world: “Parks are the babbling of women,” “the trembling of the sleeping night,” “the scurrying of mice in life.” This is no longer a light twilight, but an impenetrable darkness: “I can’t sleep. No fire. / Everywhere there is darkness and a tiresome sleep...” (II, 248). The night separates the lyrical hero from the world of other people. He is alone. He is depressed by the colorless monotony of life, its meaningless fussiness and insignificance. In Parka’s “babbling,” whispering, he hears vague hints, vague warnings. “Something” exists, as in Vyazemsky’s poem “Toska,” but this “something” has no expression or clear definition. If Vyazemsky and Boratynsky, with the effort of their souls and minds, sought to penetrate the secrets of another existence, then Pushkin, an involuntary participant in night life, before unraveling the meaning of what is happening, tries to determine his purpose in this world. He is not interested in abstract, abstract truths, but in what he can do as an individual to break through the barriers of fate, through the “boring dream.” As V.A. writes Grekhnev, “in the darkness, as the poetic theme develops, light begins to dawn. And this light is emitted not by a saving counter-idea capable of resisting the idea of ​​life as a meaningless “mouse running”, but by the very radiant element of Pushkin’s thought, the courageous ebullience of the mind, not suppressed by the force of tragic impressions” 160. It is interesting that Pushkin’s attempt to get closer to the truth is not marked by the appearance of majestic images, such as personified truth with a lamp in his hands, as, for example, in Boratynsky. With Pushkin everything is ordinary, everyday. At night, Pushkin’s lyrical hero is put to death by restlessness; he is overcome by anxiety as a hint of the need for some kind of reactive, active action, but what exactly is not revealed: What do you mean, boring whisper? I'm looking for meaning in you... (II, 248) This poem contains a motif of a lost (“lost”) day, close to Boratynsky. However, Boratynsky does not regret it, because this day is empty and meaningless for him. The exclamation “What are you up to, days?” from the poem of the same name does not contain a real question about the designation of days, it is rhetorical in nature. Boratynsky had already decided for himself that these days were useless. For Pushkin the situation is different. The very day he lost calls for an answer, he “reproaches” and “murmurs,” as if he is waiting for the repayment of debts from a person who lived this day in vain. The day regrets the person who did not take advantage of it, dooming him to sterility. The day is presented here as a living being, suffering from its uselessness to man. The return of this day can only take place when a person fully realizes what he has lost and is imbued with a feeling of regret that he did not truly live on this day. For Boratynsky, emptiness grows exponentially: he perceives not only the past days as “empty,” but also all the coming ones. Famous philosopher S.L. Frank wrote: “The truly Russian element of despondency, melancholy and tragedy... is a necessary threshold to the religious awakening of the soul” 161. Melancholy, a twilight state of soul are born from a feeling of incompleteness of earthly existence, a desire for another, higher world. Vyazemsky’s poem “Tosca” (1831) was written from the perspective of a woman—V. Bukharina—but a similar worldview is close to the poet himself. Vague, unclear experiences that have not found expression in earthly language disturb the soul of the lyrical heroine, leaving no hope for the day when life appears “without cover.” She regrets that she is unable to merge with the movement of the clouds flying into an unknown distance. The heroine of the poem gravitates towards a world that is beyond earthly sensations. “From the stuffiness of noisy materiality,” her soul rushes into the “space of another being”: I don’t know who or what I’m looking for, I can’t figure out what my thoughts are secretly full of: But there is something that makes me sad everywhere... (237) My own “I,” having lost myself in this world and looking for a way out for my melancholy and despair, becomes the center of one of Pushkin’s most pessimistic poems, “A Vain Gift, an Accidental Gift...” (1828), a poem that prompted Metropolitan Philaret 162 to respond to it with a message of his own composition. The Metropolitan could not leave unanswered the poems of the brilliant artist, theurgist, the beauty of whose creations eloquently testifies to the presence of God in the world. Pushkin himself called inspiration “a sign of God” in his poem “Conversation of a Bookseller with a Poet” (1824). Even in his youthful poem “Unbelief” (1817), written for a lyceum exam, Pushkin reflected “the tragic hopelessness of a heart incapable of religious faith” 163. S.JI. Frank comes to the conclusion that Pushkin “overcame his unbelief on a purely intellectual path: he saw the stupidity, the mental superficiality of the usual “enlightenment” denial” 164. And in this respect, Pushkin’s worldview position is close to the position of Boratynsky, who also tried to comprehend the Creator not so much with his heart as with his mind. Together with Pushkin, Boratynsky could exclaim: “The mind seeks divinity, but the heart does not find it” (I, 477). For Pushkin, the scales fluctuate between the heartfelt and intellectual knowledge of God. Thus, in his Kishinev diary of 1821, Pushkin writes down Pestel’s thought, corresponding to his own moods: “I am a materialist in my heart, but my mind resists this” (VII, 262). And in 1824, in a letter to Küchelbecker sent from Odessa, Pushkin speaks of meeting a certain “atheist” from whom he takes “lessons of pure atheism”: “The system is not as comforting as is usually thought, but, unfortunately, it is most plausible” (IX, 91). That is, now Pushkin, from the point of view of logic, is ready to accept the arguments of the “Apheus” as true, but they do not bring joy and peace to his heart, thirsting for faith. Metropolitan Filaret writes a response to Pushkin on behalf of Pushkin himself, and this is very symptomatic. Initially, the Metropolitan’s poetic response was entitled as follows: “Pushkin, who moved from dreams to reflection.” Thus, the tone of teaching and instruction is removed. Obviously, Metropolitan Philaret follows the spirit of the Christian commandment, which calls for non-judgment of one's neighbor. On the other hand, he does not separate himself from his flock, sinners, does not place himself “above,” but is among other people seeking spiritual enlightenment. If life is perceived as meaningless, then it is the fault of the person himself, since it is in his power to make it significant, of value, to fill it with content. Initially, everyone has equal rights - everyone receives life as a gift from God. From Pushkin: “Life, why were you given to me?” - from Metropolitan Philaret: “Life was given to us from God.” This removes the question “why”. Man’s life is in the will of God, and the fact that it comes precisely from Him is already its justification and gives it meaning. Everything is expedient if it abides with God and in God. The person himself is responsible for what happens to life in the future. Pushkin’s poem is very personal; it does not talk about the fate of all humanity as a whole, as, for example, in Boratynsky’s “Excerpt” (1823). Pushkin’s focus is on his personal fate: why life was given to him, for what he is doomed to suffer. Everything evil, hostile, painful that is generated in the human soul has its source in internal, not external causes. To Pushkin’s questions: “Who called me out of insignificance with a hostile power, / Filled my soul with passion, / Excited me with doubt?..” (II, 139), Metropolitan Philaret answers: I myself am capricious in power Evil has called out from the dark abysses, He filled his soul with passion, The mind was agitated by doubt 165. You get what you sow. Metropolitan Philaret depicts a person as an active subject who can control his will, desires, and passions. Pushkin’s “I” is suffering and suffering. The poet is more an object on which actions incomprehensible to him are performed, rather than a subject. Pushkin unites in his poem the one who gave him life and the one who “filled his soul with passion” and “excited his mind with doubt.” Metropolitan Philaret shares: life is given by God, but man himself fills it with content. Self-will is the name of that hostile force that devastates the soul and has a destructive effect on the mind. A person’s enemy is his unclean thoughts and actions. In poetic phraseology, the word “insignificance” often means another being (“Insignificance, an empty ghost, / You are alien to human thought, / The proud mind fears you”). In the poetics of Metropolitan Philaret, “non-existence” is the “dark abyss” from which man himself calls forth evil forces and submits to their power. Loss of purpose in life is loss of God, support, faith in yourself, in your purpose. Life becomes monochromatic, only one string sounds in it - the string of dull boredom. Enlightenment is possible only on the path to God. He is a true helper in bright, righteous endeavors if they believe in Him. If all evil is accomplished by man by his own will, then all good is sanctified by the presence of God: Remember me, forgotten by me! Shine through the darkness of doom Metropolitan Philaret appeals to God on behalf of Pushkin, thereby showing the poet the path on which spiritual improvement awaits him, finding meaning in life: “Remember me, forgotten by me!” The poet must not believe, not find, but rather remember God, and you can only remember someone who was previously present in your life, but whose image was obscured by other impressions. “Twilight of thoughts” leads to the onset of “darkness of spirit” - the loss of faith in God, the most important moral guideline in life. In one of his letters to clergy, Metropolitan Philaret asks the question: “Does the soul of someone praying intensely enter into communion with the one for whom he is praying? In this communication, does not a current of power sometimes extend to a soul seeking help? 166. It seems that this kind of spiritual communication took place between the Moscow Metropolitan and Pushkin. Metropolitan Philaret, with his address, managed to illuminate the poet’s soul, bringing to life Pushkin’s beautiful poem “In Hours of Fun...” (1830). The imperfection of the soul, often easily accessible to rebellious impulses, is destroyed by the fiery word of the archpastor. Pushkin repents of his spiritual weakness, his inability to honor the trials placed on him. It is no coincidence that Pushkin calls the sounds of his lyre “effeminate”, born in moments of spiritual and mental idleness. The stanzas are addressed to Metropolitan Philaret, but most likely the context of the poem is broader, and Pushkin, speaking about the hand that extends to him “from a spiritual height,” also means God Almighty, the God whom Metropolitan Philaret called on him to remember. The poet's lyre must always be in tune with the seraph's harp, which is a tuning fork that does not allow the string to emit a single false sound: But even then the strings of evil Involuntarily I interrupted the ringing, When your voice is majestic I was suddenly struck. (II, 218) Strength does not manifest itself in struggle, but in humility, a spirit of meekness, and is guided on the righteous path by love and compassion. In Pushkin’s original edition, the poem ended with the following lines: Your soul is warmed by your fire, Rejected the darkness of earthly vanities, The poet is in holy horror. (II, 218) The changes introduced expanded the context of the poem, enhanced the solemnity of the tone, and conveyed the effect of the shock that the Metropolitan’s speech caused in the poet’s soul. P.Ya. Chaadaev wrote to Pushkin: “Throw a cry to the sky, it will respond” 167. And this is exactly the case when the sky responded to a desperate cry. The poet experiences “sacred horror” while listening to the seraph’s harp. In his soul, that divine principle, which was covered with the “darkness of thoughts,” was again awakened. A. Pozov, exploring Pushkin’s works in a metaphysical aspect, identifies seraphic poetry in his work. “Seraphism is the angelicity of man and the humanlikeness of an angel. If two natures in a person - earthly and heavenly - do not suppress one another, then the heavenly angelic nature lives in him and manifests itself. Seraphism is a feeling of transcendence, otherworldliness, this is the sixth sense... Those who have this feeling see, in addition to the things of the visible world, things and objects, beings and essences that are still hidden to the ordinary eye" 168 . Pushkin, like no one else, knows the discontinuity of the creative process, the state when he is overcome by “boredom,” “cold sleep,” and “dejection.” But his sensitive ear is always able to catch and perceive the “divine verb” calling him from “everyday care” to the heights of the “heavenly world.” In “Excerpt” (1823) by Boratynsky, the full title of which is: “An excerpt from the poem “Faith and Unbelief,””, in the context of one poem, two voices are heard, belonging to him and her, the hero and the heroine. The serene introduction, painting wonderful landscapes and a picture of the happiness of two people loving each other, does not foreshadow anxiety. However, the terrible word she suddenly dropped “can’t survive” at the thought of the possible early death of her loved one touches a previously silent string in the hero’s soul. The balance is disrupted, the hero’s part begins to sound in a different key, destroying the visible harmony both in the surrounding nature and in her soul. Notes of confusion, fear, and reproaches are increasingly heard in his voice, “rebellious” questions arise from the depths of his soul, to which he seeks, but does not find answers. The heroine calms the hero, trying to restore the newly lost harmony and happiness: death puts a limit only on a person’s earthly existence - “there is existence beyond the grave.” For the heroine, there is no point in life without faith: “Ah! How to love without this faith? He accepts her argument, but develops this idea in his own way. He needs not only to find another life beyond the threshold of earthly existence, but also to find justification for what is happening now, to resolve his doubts, to find meaning and justification for the present world order. Thus, the question is raised not about the existence of the Creator, but about His goodness and justice. The problem of theodicy is clearly posed in Boratynsky's lyrics. He wants an explanation of the world order, the meaning of human life on earth. “The brilliant ray of the all-illuminating day” is the main goal of his quest. Boratynsky drives away the frightening thought that “beyond the world of phenomena” “nothing” awaits people. For him, in this case, earthly life simply does not make sense. If there is another world, then man will have to account for his life. The ideal for Boratynsky in this sense is Goethe, who completely exhausted every moment of existence, knew how to enjoy it, experiencing life as a priceless gift from God. But, on the other hand, Boratynsky is convinced that man himself is a justification for God if he did not live his life in vain and for him not a single day was empty. Therefore, the life that God breathed into him had the highest meaning. It is likely that the remarks of the heroine of “Excerpt” contain echoes of the attitude that not only the hero, but also the author of the poem would like to find. However, Boratynsky cannot approach such a state due to his overly analytical approach to solving those issues in which the primacy belongs not to rational, but to heartfelt, intuitive knowledge. What enters the soul, bypassing logical arguments, does not need proof, and cannot be proven due to the limitations of the human mind: “Are convictions really necessary, my dear, / For the convinced?” (156). The heroine’s monologues cannot be considered as completely alien to the author’s consciousness, existing in opposition and having no significance for changing the hero’s internal state. Although it should be admitted that the heroine’s position in “Excerpt” is more vulnerable. Whether thanks to his own conclusions or the beliefs of his beloved woman, the lyrical hero ultimately comes to a more or less positive conclusion about the expediency of what is happening in life. The hope settles in him that everything will be revealed to a person in due time, and this to some extent returns to him the lost peace. On the contrary, “heart trembling” and sadness arise in the heroine’s soul. But it seems that this state is caused not by the fact that doubt has entered her soul and her faith has been shaken by contrary arguments, but by anxiety for her loved one, who is tormented by insoluble questions, without gaining real, living faith. It is the heroine who is entrusted with the role of the mediator who is called upon to unite in harmony the heavenly voices and the voice of her chosen one. In the 1840s, Vyazemsky wrote most of his prayer lyrics. One of his best works of this period is the miniature “Love. Pray. Sing" (1839). This triad was reflected in Boratynsky’s dedication, in which he talks about his chants, imbued with a feeling of love “for the good, the lofty,” and sends up prayers of consolation and help to Vyazemsky. Vyazemsky, as it were, gives an answer to the question asked by Pushkin and Boratynsky: “Life, why were you given to me?” The “destination of the soul”, which perceives earthly life as an exile from the heavenly homeland, is in love, prayer and chants - those most important links that introduce a person to the “holy sacrament”, again leading to union with God, to the atonement of guilt. The nature of love, prayer and song is unearthly in origin. It is important to focus on these heavenly pledges, choose them as your guiding star, and dedicate your life to them. The sequence in which Vyazemsky names these three sacred strings is not accidental. Love opens a person’s heart to God, a desire arises to communicate with Him, to pour out one’s heartfelt heat on Him. The language in which one communicates with God, prayer, is “an unclosable door to the altar, to the sacred place of God’s presence” 169. Finally, the poet’s creative prayer is his chants (remember Pushkin: “We were born for inspiration, for sweet sounds and prayers”). God is where beauty lives. “Wherever nature or human culture reveals something beautiful, everywhere there is a breath of the Spirit of God...” 170. Communion with beauty, and therefore with God, is carried out through love, prayer and songs. But internal tension is required from a person in order to be able to attune his soul to the perception of beauty. The poet is given the opportunity to contemplate the “high world”, capturing it in the sounds of his songs. He is a mediator, a “living harp” that responds to every touch of invisible forces on its strings. Vyazemsky in his memoirs called Pushkin the Aeolian harp, which is the highest praise for the artist, since the harp is a symbol of true poetry. Vyazemsky wrote: “Pushkin was always a child of inspiration, a child of the fleeting moment. And that is why all his creations are so alive and convincing. This is the Aeolian harp, which trembled under the attack of all four winds from the sky and responded to them with a song” 171. And in Vyazemsky’s poem “Love. Pray. Sing” also has an image of a harp: Happy is he who is given to know your joy, Who cups the cup of joy and the cup of bitter sorrow Always blessed with love and prayer And the inner songs were like a living harp! (268) Vyazemsky placed special emphasis on the ability to accept the suffering that befalls a person. This is also a great gift when a person sees in suffering a spiritually meaningful phenomenon, a call to enlightenment of the soul, leading to improvement. I.A. Ilyin wrote: “A person who is sent suffering should feel not “doomed” and not “cursed,” but “sought,” “visited,” and “called”: he is allowed to suffer in order to be cleansed.” 172 In Vyazemsky’s poetic work, this miniature is an example of the subtlest spiritual penetration into the essence of the most intimate things and a reflection of the goodness and peace that so rarely descended on his soul. The world, given only in empirical sensations, is not capable of satisfying a person who seeks to oppose its material side with something that goes beyond its limits. The poetic word makes it possible to feel the breath of God in oneself and in the world, to hear the mysterious voices of another, better existence, to get closer to that “wonderful city” that the restless soul so seeks. Kasatkina V.N. The prayer meaning of the poem by F.I. Tyutchev “Silentium!” "Silentium!" - one of the most mysterious poems by F.I. Tyutchev, which has a long history of interpretations that has not yet been completed. The poem was not understood by the first readers when it was published in 1833 in the newspaper “Molva” by N.I. Nadezhdina. I.S. Aksakov noted: ““Silentium,” published in 1835 (Aksakov made a factual error. - V.K.) in “Rumor,” did not attract any attention.” In it, as the biographer claims, “all this weakness of the poet is so well expressed - to convey in precise words, in a logical formula of speech, the inner life of the soul in its fullness and truth.” 173. Tyutchev’s moods "Silentium!" were reflected in the lyrics of Aksakov himself. H.A. Nekrasov, the first connoisseur of Tyutchev’s poetry in the 1840s and early 1850s, also singled out this poem, classifying it as one of the group of the poet’s works “in which thought predominates,” 174 but he did not explain its content. And a reviewer from the magazine “Library for Reading” discovered a lack of understanding of the deep meaning of the poem, calling it “cute in thought and its expression,” seeing not the originality of the ideas (“everyone thinks exactly the same as Mr. Tyutchev”), but the fact that “a great writer is the one who, for a thought that is felt by everyone, finds the truest, shortest and most beautiful expression, which others cannot find” 175 . "Silentium!" Symbolists persistently and persistently explained it at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries. Almost every one of the largest representatives of this literary movement tried to find a deep meaning in it - philosophical, religious, aesthetic, individual psychological. V.Ya. Bryusov, interpreting Tyutchev’s poem, solves the epistemological problem: “From the consciousness of the incomprehensibility of the world, something else follows - the impossibility of expressing one’s soul, telling one’s thoughts to another: How can the heart express itself? Will he understand what you live for? Just as human thought is powerless, so is the human word. Before the beauty of nature, Tyutchev vividly felt this powerlessness and compared his thought to a “shot bird.” It is not surprising, therefore, that in one of his most sincere poems he left us such stern advice: Just know how to live within yourself..." 176. A. Derman’s objections to Bryusov did not bring adequate clarity to the interpretation of Tyutchev’s now famous poem. He wrote: “Thus, from the famous exclamation “A thought expressed is a lie!” Mr. Bryusov made a syllogistic bridge to the statement about the preference of non-rational forms of comprehension of the world over rational knowledge. This is clearly unconvincing and is based on an inexplicable ignorance of the direct meaning of the exclamation and the entire poem “Silentium” as a whole. Not “thought, that is, all rational knowledge, is a lie,” but “thought expressed,” and the meaning of the poem is exclusively that a thought is distorted at its birth when transformed into a word” 177. Then, explaining and quoting the poem, the polemicist clarifies his understanding of Tyutchev’s idea: “The powerlessness of the word lies in the inability to convey the power of thought, the meaning is not in the equality of thought and word, but in the difference, in the leakage and distortion of thought when transmitted to another” 178. The intellectualistic direction in the interpretation of Tyutchev’s poem by Bryusov and Derman (the differences in their opinions are not too significant: for Bryusov, both the thought and the word of a person are “powerless”; for Derman, only the word is “powerless”, unable to “convey” thought) reinforced the understanding of the poem, which was expressed in the printing of the second line in “Rumor”: And your thoughts and dreams! 179 Tyutchev’s autograph has a significantly different option: “And my feelings and dreams.” The beginning of his poem is associated with the image of “spiritual depth”, and not with the idea of ​​intellectual secrecy or underestimation of the human word. Religious and philosophical interpretation of “Silentium!” – in the essay by D.S. Merezhkovsky. Noting the relevance of Tyutchev’s poem (it is “today’s, tomorrow’s”), the symbolist critic sought to reproduce the poet’s logic: if the world is based on evil will, active action is meaningless, only contemplation is reasonable. If practical activity is meaningless and a person is not needed by another for action, then there is no need for communication. Hence the conclusion: “Only know how to live within yourself” - an expression of individualism, loneliness, and lack of society. The next step on the same path, states Merezhkovsky, is taken by Balmont, who wanted to live by himself and be his own sun, and Z. Gippius, who wants to “love herself like God.” “Suicides still do not know that the potassium cyanide with which they are poisoned is Silence: “Be silent, hide and hide / And your feelings and dreams... / Just know how to live within yourself...”. His disease is ours: individualism, loneliness, lack of society” 180. The initial thesis of Merezhkovsky's reasoning was false: he attributed to Tyutchev a belief in evil will as the basis of existence. Hence he accused the poet of individualism and lack of society, which Bryusov passionately objected to, convincingly refuting Merezhkovsky, recalling the poet’s civic poems, his journalism, Tyutchev’s real sociability, his love for Russia and the Russian people 181. Other symbolists - K.D. Balmont, Vyach. Ivanov, A. Bely - to a greater extent comprehended the meaning of Tyutchev's poem, focusing on the content of the poet's spiritual experience, but at the same time they tried to bring Tyutchev closer to the symbolists in the awareness of world existence. “The artistic impressionability of a symbolist poet, full of pantheistic moods, cannot submit to the visible; it transforms everything in the depths of the soul, and external facts, processed by philosophical consciousness, appear before us as shadows caused by a magician. Tyutchev understood the need for that great silence, from the depths of which, as from an enchanted cave, illuminated by an inner light, transformed, beautiful ghosts emerge” 182. Vyach. Ivanov further deepens the idea of ​​Tyutchev’s penetration into the innermost at special moments of spiritual existence. Vyach. Ivanov: ““Be silent, hide and hide” is the banner of Tyutchev’s poetry; his words are “secret signs of the great and unspeakable music of the spirit”” 183. The poet-theorist meant self-immersion, when “there are no barriers between a person and the naked abyss, such an introduction to the world’s abyss is inexpressible in words and requires Silentium. This moment of existence is valuable and eternal. And Tyutchev sang about silence more inspiredly than anyone else. “Be silent, hide and conceal...” - this is the new banner raised by him. Moreover, Tyutchev’s most important feat is the feat of poetic silence. That is why there are so few of his poems, and his few words are meaningful and mysterious, like some secret signs of the great and ineffable music of the spirit. The time has come when the “thought expressed” became a lie” 184. Vyach’s thought is especially valuable. Ivanov about the “unspeakable music of the spirit” in special moments of being connected to the world’s abysses. However, in "Silentium!" there is no image of the world abyss, the main one is the image of “spiritual depth”, starry, as if washed with pure, unclouded keys of innermost feelings, dreams, thoughts. The Symbolists underestimated the poet's religious and aesthetic attitude to the Word. In Tyutchev's poem they looked for a model of symbolic poetry and thus modernized its content in the spirit of their own creative searches. If “a thought expressed is a lie” and no logical combination of words, no specific image can adequately express the idea, the only way remains is “the poetry of hints, symbols” 185 - this is how V.Ya. developed his thought. Bryusov. “Living speech is always the music of the inexpressible”; “a thought expressed is a lie,” wrote A. Bely, referring to Tyutchev, and concluded: “In a word-symbol, the wordless” inner world of a person is connected with the “meaningless outer world” 186. Ultimately, the development of this thought, he reduced lyrical creativity to a magical spell through onomatopoeia and found a model in the poetic experience of Tyutchev. Symbolists did not turn to the interpretation of this poem by L.N. Tolstoy in one of his final works - the book “The Reading Circle”. In interpreting Tyutchev's masterpiece, or rather commenting on it, the originality of the religious position of the late Tolstoy was revealed, testifying to the development and modification of his beliefs. Tolstoy's religious and philosophical treatise on “Silentium!” suggests that the writer is most interested in the mystical (rather than the real) essence of religion. In Tyutchev's poem, Tolstoy saw extremely important and necessary moral content for a person. He intended "Silentium!" for reading on September 30, the name day of Saints Faith, Hope and Love and their mother Sophia. Tolstoy’s introductory statement, which contains the ideological key to the interpretation of the poem, is an important thesis: “The more secluded a person is, the more he hears the voice of God always calling him.” That is, Tolstoy put forward the problem of human communication with the Creator. Tolstoy by no means believes that silence, refusal to communicate with another person, individualism (“just know how to live within yourself...”) are constant, universal principles of human existence. Vyach's idea is closer to him. Ivanov (expressed later, following Tolstoy) about special “moments of being” of a person. Tolstoy: “Temporary renunciation from everything worldly and contemplation of one’s divine essence within oneself is the same necessary nourishment for life for the soul as food for the body” 187 . Tolstoy by no means deduces from Tyutchev’s poem a refusal to communicate with other people. The first two judgments in “The Reading Circle” reveal the psychological mechanism of the moral call to silence: “Just because a good intention has been expressed, the desire to fulfill it has already been weakened” 188 . The writer does not at all reveal any condemnation of human speech. One should remain silent about the good movements of the soul in order to better realize them. The second argument is even more important: a person’s conscience requires an active inner life, mental concentration: “The best part of the drama that happens in our soul is a monologue or, rather, an intimate discussion between God, our conscience and us.” Tolstoy did not use the word “prayer,” but he speaks specifically about it when he writes about the “calling voice of God” and about the “monologue” (“reasoning”) of a person addressed to God and emanating from the person’s soul, from his conscience. Tolstoy ignored that paradoxical judgment that so fascinated the Symbolists: “A thought expressed is a lie.” Human speech, apparently understood as verbosity, does not satisfy the deepest moral needs of man, which are always mysterious and unidentified. Tyutchev’s famous poem was mastered collectively, or better yet, collectively, since the efforts of many were aimed at comprehending certain absolute truths that everyone strives for, as a reviewer from the “Library for Reading” stated, but does not know how to verbally express this primordial need of the soul - in prayer addressed to the Almighty. The very movement of the poet’s thoughts from stanza to stanza is important. The first stanza is dedicated to the image of “spiritual depth.” Tolstoy was right when he spoke about human conscience in connection with this poem. He understood spiritual depth as conscience, although the poet did not use the word “conscience.” His concept of spiritual depth is not identical to the human soul. “Soul” - “psyche”, the Greek Psyche is a broader concept, it includes feelings, dreams, thoughts, thoughts, but these are only individual components of the “whole world” of the soul. Its depth is something even more cherished, hidden and sublime. The poet likens this cherished thing to the stars. He talks about those manifestations of a person’s inner world that rise from the depths of the soul, like stars in the sky, rise and set. Stars in Tyutchev’s poetic context are deities to which the human soul strives: The soul would like to be a star; But not when from the midnight sky These lights are like living eyes, They look at the sleepy earthly world, - But during the day, when hidden like smoke They, like deities, burn brighter In the ether, pure and invisible. Likewise, in the later poem “The feast is over, the choirs have fallen silent...” (late 1840 - early 1850s), the poet depicts the turning of human gaze, and therefore souls, to the pure stars, which “respond” to “mortal glances / With immaculate rays.” "Silentium!" Tyutchev stylistically uses archaic sayings: it is important for him to evoke the impression of the ancient, the primordial, the sublimely eternal. His editors and publishers, with the exception of Pushkin, did not understand this desire of the poet and simplified his poetic speeches: the poet’s autograph of the 4th and 5th lines was: “They rise and set / Silently, like stars in the night...” (emphasis placed by me. - V.K.). But Russian poetry knew similar stresses, especially in the word “stars” - see, for example, Lomonosov: “The stars have no number, / The bottom of the abyss ...” (“Evening reflection on God’s greatness”). However, these lines were published in “Rumor”: “They rise and hide / Like peaceful stars in the night...”; in Sovremennik in 1854 and in subsequent editions: “And they rise and set, / Like clear stars in the night...”. The ancient accents (“set i t”, “stars a m”) disappeared, the word “silently”, important for the concept, disappeared, and non-Tyutchev epithets appeared: “peaceful stars”, “clear stars”. Tyutchev has a more significant definition of stars: they are “like deities,” they are “luminaries,” “like living eyes” (in the poem “The Soul Wanted to Be a Star...”), their rays are “immaculate.” It is these stars that the poet speaks about in the poem “Silentium!”, it is they who “Rise and set / Silently...”. The poet captured that movement in the depths of the soul, which is similar to celestial phenomena. Silence is a special moment in the life of nature, like a “premonition” of something significant (“There is silence in the stuffy air, / Like a premonition of a thunderstorm...”). In Tyutchev’s poetry, the word-image “silence” has multiple meanings. Silence can be “dead” (“The stream has thickened and is dimming...”;), mysterious and meaningful (“But yours, nature, the world, is silent about the days of yore / With an ambiguous and secret smile...” - “I passed through the Livonian fields...”), nocturnal, unsteady, changeable (“And the unsteady silence of the night / Barely flowed with the wind...” - “Awakening”; or: “And Silence reigned / Shadows walked along the walls / And a half-asleep flicker...” - “The merry day was still roaring...”). And yet, “silence” = “silence” is always filled with content and promises something important. When Tyutchev speaks about the stellar depths of the soul, he no longer means the psyche in general, but the main thing in it is the spirit, human spirituality, that which ascends to the Almighty. He already said this in “Glimpse”: “With our souls we fly to the immortal!” The poet by no means idealized man, being well aware of his sinfulness, the variability of mental states, and some unreliability of impulses. All the more significant was his call - to take care of that spiritual-stellar, divine that is in the soul: “Admire them - and be silent.” The problem of understanding and human communication arises in the second stanza. But it also does not deny human communication. The poet does not mean an ordinary exchange of speeches, not at all everyday communication: “How can the heart express itself?” “Heart”, “soul” are almost identical concepts, and the word “spirit” is in the same semantic nest. It is difficult to express spiritual depth in a direct statement, and this should not be done, since true self-disclosure can only be prayerful, intimate, addressed to God, and not to another person: “How can someone else understand you?” In this context, the famous aphorism-paradox appeared: “A thought expressed is a lie - / By exploding, you will disturb the keys...”. The symbolists, constantly quoting Tyutchev’s phrase “A thought expressed is a lie,” usually put a period at the end, and the reviewer from the “Library for Reading” even put an exclamation mark; Also, the publishers did not reproduce the very important semantically important dash at the end of the line. For Tyutchev, this idea (“A thought expressed is a lie”) is devoid of categoricalness, completeness, universality, unconditionality; on the contrary, it is conditional, relative, incomplete (there is a dash at the end of the phrase, not a period); “lies” appear because by “exploding” the depths of the “soul” - the “heart”, one can muddy the pure keys or star rays of spirituality. The word “exploding” also refers to a particularly semantically significant word in Tyutchev’s vocabulary: the poet said about the night wind: “And you dig and explode in it / Sometimes frantic sounds...” (in “it” - in the heart). And Tyutchev made a characteristic edit in the translation. Initially, in the first passage in line 14 it was: “the sea swell And hits its stone shore”; the poet remade the translation: “And he digs his stone bank.” And in the 19th line it says: “And the swell oppresses, and the air digs...”. The poet repeats the word “dig”, which has the same root, and each time he notes either the danger or the undesirability of “explosions”, as if destroying the harmony of the soul, the harmony of being. In letters to his wife Ernestina Fedorovna, the poet also repeatedly spoke about his difficulties in expressing the deep feelings that he experiences towards her. The sacred is inexpressible, it is prayerfully secret. However, this does not mean an underestimation of the word, which Tyutchev often spoke about in verses 190, often wrote with a capital letter (“Word”), spoke about serving the Word and in it found a means of spiritual unity of people: When our word is sympathetic We don't need any other retribution Enough is enough for us, enough is enough for us... (II, 156) The third stanza returned to the first image of the “whole world” in the soul, but changes were again made to its definition, changing Tyutchev’s thought, making it more ordinary. In Tyutchev's autograph: There is a whole world in your soul Mysteriously magical thoughts - The rays of day will disperse (I, 123) But in “Rumour” an option appeared: “They will be deafened by the noise of everyday life / The rays of day will disperse them...”. The poet has a more generalized philosophical meaning in line 16: he means “external noise”, and not a specific, almost everyday “everyday noise”. In editions of the 1850s and subsequent ones, it appeared here: “They will be drowned out by the external noise / The rays of day will blind them...”. The very strong-sounding word “deafen” has disappeared, which weakened the expressiveness of the line and reduced the negative effect of external noise on the soul. The 17th line in the publisher's edit was noticeably lost in terms of meaning: it turned out that the poet was saying that the rays of the day “blind” the thoughts - a stylistic failure. Tyutchev’s “rays” will “disperse” thoughts. The publishers were not satisfied with the archaic-sounding word “dispersed”; they abandoned it, but in this way they simplified Tyutchev’s thought and deprived it of its solemn significance. “The great and untold music of the spirit,” which Vyach so rightly said. Ivanov, - in the rhythmic organization of the poem. Its beginning, the word “be silent,” was repeated three times at the end of the epiphora of the stanzas, which are given with variations. An epiphora is like a song’s chorus: “be silent,” “be silent,” “be silent” are repeated. However, these last lines in the stanzas revealed a combination of spiritual activity and, as it were, passive isolation. The poet demands: “Admire them - and be silent”; “Feed on them - and be silent...”; “Listen to their singing - and be silent!..” In this context, the word “be silent” means caring for that cherished thing that is stored in the depths of the soul and can only belong to the Almighty, and not to a person - “another.” Variants of the syntactic design of the last lines (period, ellipsis, exclamation point and ellipsis) indicate an emotional increase, strengthening the meaning of the call. Tyutchev's silentium is filled with deep, sacred content, encouraging a person to spiritual and moral, essentially prayerful activity. Petrova L.E. The image of the Virgin Mary in the poetry of F.I. Tyutcheva The image of the Queen of Heaven, so dear to the hearts of the Russian people, is constantly present in the spiritual consciousness of any Orthodox family. The Holy Church calls the Virgin Mary a spiritual ladder, born from the earth and connecting earth with heaven. Through Her, as through a ladder, God descended to earth and opened the entrance to the Kingdom of Heaven to all His faithful followers who resort to the protection of His Mother. Icons of the Most Holy Theotokos, the Diligent Intercessor, the Joy of all who mourn, along with the icons of the Savior, were especially revered in Rus' and were in any Orthodox family. The image of the Queen of Heaven accompanied man from birth to death. They resorted to Her in sorrow and in joy, in moments of danger and with gratitude for deliverance. A Christian's home has always been a home church, where children learned to believe, love, sacrifice, and learn about the world. It was in the house that the foundations of a person’s spiritual worldview were formed. Raised in a patriarchal family, where “the dominance of French speech did not exclude, however, adherence to Russian customs and surprisingly coexisted next to the Church Slavonic reading of psalters, books of hours, prayer books and in general with all the features of Russian Orthodox and noble life” 191, Fyodor Tyutchev was accustomed to honoring the icons of the Most Holy Theotokos from childhood. Prayers were often served in the house; in his old age, the poet recalled how he and his mother on Easter waited for the first strike of the bell, which announced the good news of the risen Savior. I.S. In his biographical sketch, Aksakov gives touching examples of the relationship between an adult Tyutchev and his mother, Ekaterina Lvovna, a simple Russian Orthodox woman: “Without thinking, without guessing about any admonition or influence, following only the custom and desire of the heart, she treats the European wise guy, as she did with the child Fedinka - and her mature, almost old son with tenderness succumbs to her mother’s demands, understanding and appreciating their good meaning" 192. His uncle, Nikolai Afanasyevich Khlopov, also had a great influence on the formation of the poet’s personality; “literate, pious, he enjoyed great respect from his masters” 193. Nikolai Afanasyevich left behind a long prayerful memory, bequeathing to Tyutchev the icon of the Mother of God “Seeking the Lost,” which the poet sacredly kept in his office until his death. Apparently, icons of the Mother of God predominated in the Tyutchev family. I.S. Aksakov in his “Biography of Fyodor Ivanovich Tyutchev” mentions the special veneration of images of the Blessed Virgin Mary. In the will of Ernestina Fedorovna, who before her death considered the fate of family shrines, of the nine icons mentioned, five are images of the Queen of Heaven. In the biographical sketch of I.S. Aksakov provides an excerpt from Tyutchev’s letter, in which he talks about his farewell to his mother before leaving Moscow in 1858: “I once again said goodbye to my mother, once again placed, next to her, three bows to the ground before her Kazan Mother of God” 194. The Kazan Icon of the Most Holy Theotokos belongs to the Hodegetria type, which means Guide, they pray to her for protection from “enemies visible and invisible”, for deliverance from all evils, for the Mother of God is the Divine protection of all believing Orthodox Christians. And it was important for Catherine Lvovna to entrust her beloved son to the Heavenly Intercessor, who preserves everyone who flows to Her with faith. The Kazan Icon of the Mother of God, one of the most beloved in Rus', was reverently revered by Ernestina Feodorovna, the poet’s second wife. In 1889, this icon was brought to her from Kazan by Ivan Fedorovich, Tyutchev’s youngest son, and his wife Olga Fedorovna, née Putyata. It was customary in the family to give holy images to loved ones. The first icon given to Ernestina Fedorovna by her sister-in-law Daria Ivanovna Sushkova was the icon of the Mother of God. Tyutchev himself sacredly revered the icons of the Most Holy Theotokos, and his children, raised by him in the Orthodox faith, treated the shrines with the same reverence. Anna Fedorovna Tyutcheva especially loved the Iveron Icon of the Mother of God. In difficult moments of her life, she read an akathist, part of which she knew by heart, to this miraculous image. Loving to come to the ancient capital, in which, according to Anna Feodorovna, “the soul feels freer than in the lush Northern Palmyra” 195, the poet’s eldest daughter visited the chapel at the entrance to the Kremlin, built in honor of this icon. Everyone in the Tyutchev family prayed to the Iveron Icon of the Mother of God. In a letter to Ernestina Fedorovna in 1843, the poet mentions that he was present at a prayer service in honor of the Iveron Icon of the Mother of God, and Ernestina Fedorovna had this image, given to her by Anna. The image of the Queen of Heaven was constantly present in the spiritual atmosphere of the family and through the reading of the New Testament, the books of which Tyutchev gave to his daughters. The reverently revered image of the Most Holy Theotokos, which occupied an important place in Tyutchev’s life, also illuminated his work. B.Ya. Bukhshtab, like many researchers of the poet’s lyricism, notes that it was characterized by “an impulse to the sky, to the upper, lofty limit” 196. Sometimes Tyutchev’s poetry is called prose in verse because of the eternal problems of existence raised in it - life and death, the meaning of human existence. In the poet's poems, man is correlated with the universe, with the universe, his private life, the momentary in it are correlated with eternity. Orthodox images and reminiscences from the Holy Scriptures are especially strong in the second half of the poet’s work, in the lyrics of the 1840s–1870s. However, even in his early work, despite some “bold” lines, Tyutchev expresses a Christian, Orthodox worldview. In general, according to K.V. Pigarev, “Tyutchev’s religious freethinking <...> did not go beyond the framework of that superficial Voltairianism, which from the middle of the 18th century was quite widespread in Russian noble circles” 197. In the poem of the early 1830s “The East was white... The boat was rolling...” an amazing image of a praying girl was created. I.S. Aksakov called Tyutchev’s poetry “bashful”: “It does not sing of “gypsies” or “concubines”, or night orgies, or sensual delights, or even naked female charms” 198. Without drawing a portrait, the poet creates a wonderful female image, distinguished by its special sublimity and spirituality. Researchers have not been able to find out who the poem is dedicated to and what memories it is inspired by. But the reverent feeling that arises when reading it evokes the image of the Most Holy Theotokos before the reader’s mental gaze. The Queen of Heaven is a symbol of kindness and moral purity, immaculate beauty of the soul and Christian humility. In the lyrical heroine of the poem one can see such features of the Most Holy Theotokos as meekness, sinlessness, humility, sincere and pure faith. An atmosphere of sublime spirituality is created by the use of outdated vocabulary, emphasizing the solemnity and significance of what is happening: The East was red... She prayed, Throwing back the veil from my forehead, - The sky rejoiced in my eyes... The East flared up... She bowed... And on infant cheeks Drops of fire flowed... 199 Tyutchev makes you feel all the power of faith, sincerity and warmth of prayer. Holy words breathe in the lips of a young girl, and the heavenly world is reflected in her gaze. The poem is very harmonious. Just as the prayer intensifies from stanza to stanza, ending with tears, the radiance of the surrounding world intensifies: “The East turned white / The East turned red / The East flared up...” The apotheosis of the poem is the golden radiance of the rising sun, illuminating the bowed figure of a praying girl. Characterizing the colors of Russian icon painting, Prince Evgeny Trubetskoy writes: “Icon-painting mysticism is, first of all, solar mysticism in the highest, spiritual meaning of the word. No matter how beautiful other heavenly colors may be, the gold of the sun is still a color from flowers and a miracle from miracles” 200. The sunshine permeates the entire space of the poem. This radiance ignited the prayer tears, turning them into “drops of fire.” The motif of tears is the main one in the 1823 poem “Tears.” Despite the abundance of bright, earthly images, the mention of the Greek deity and the playful, enthusiastic pathos so characteristic of the lyrical works of the young poet, the poem expresses an Orthodox understanding of tears. Tyutchev calls them “the dew of the divine morning.” Tears are the mercy and grace of God. Sincere, heartfelt prayer and repentance are impossible without tears; they cleanse the filth of sin, wash the soul, again giving a person the opportunity to get closer to the Creator. Orthodox Christians pray not only to the Savior, but also to His Most Pure Mother for the gift of tears of repentance. The Divine Son of the Most Holy Theotokos gave Her special grace to help the weak, heal the afflicted, and comfort the sad. All who resort to Her with faith and fervent prayer find intercession and help. According to Tyutchev, the weeping and contrite soul is given the ability to see hosts of angelic and seraphim faces: You, angel of tears, will touch your wings - Suddenly it will develop before your eyes. (1, 45) This poem received negative reviews from critics in both the 19th and 20th centuries. K.V. Pigarev in the book “F.I. Tyutchev and his time” writes: “This is a typical sentimental-romantic admiration of tears, in which a mortal finds pure pleasure and spiritual insight. The basis of the poem is bookish, and therefore it does not excite or touch us” 201. A completely different impression, according to critics, is produced by the poem “Human Tears, O Human Tears...” written in 1849 on the same topic. However, despite the more perfect artistic embodiment of thought, it does not contain that religious understanding of tears that distinguishes the earlier work. An echo of the Christian understanding of tears, as in the lyrical work of 1823, is heard in the 1866 poem “So! He is saved!..” It was written on the occasion of the assassination attempt on Alexander II on April 4, 1866. In lines: And a feeling of joy spread throughout Russia... But in the midst of prayers, in the midst of grateful tears, A persistent thought involuntarily gnaws at the heart (2.155), - tears of gratitude are the result of a prayer tirelessly offered to the Lord and His Most Pure Mother for the salvation of the sovereign-emperor. The same motif of the cathedral prayer sounds in the 1865 poem “April 12, 1865.” It was written on the occasion of the death of the eldest son of Emperor Alexander II, Grand Duke Nikolai Alexandrovich. A prayer connection is established between the soul of the deceased and the entire Russian people: With all Russian hearts Now he is praying for her, - About her, whose bitterness is tested Only She will understand and measure, Who, having sanctified suffering, She stood, crying, at the cross... (2, 140) The main theme of the poem is maternal suffering. The heir to the throne is not afraid of death, for in another world his soul will see the Creator: Everything is decided and he is calm, He, who endured to the end, - Know that he was worthy before God Another, better crown... (2, 140) But how to survive the death of a loving mother’s son? The lyric poet entrusts the empress with the intercession and help of the Most Holy Theotokos. At the end of the poem, a stern, mournful image of the Mother of God appears, allowing us to remember the Gospel text. Following the entire way of the cross of Her Son, standing at the crucifixion, the Virgin Mary knew suffering. The words of the righteous Simeon were fulfilled: “Behold, this One is destined for the fall and the uprising of many in Israel and for the subject of controversy - and a weapon will pierce your very soul.” (Luke 2:34–35). And therefore, who else but She will “understand, measure all the bitterness of the trial” and console the grieving mother, for the Mother’s prayer can do much for the mercy of the Lord. The Mother of God, “who gave birth to God the Word,” brings the light of the Gospel, giving salvation and healing to the tormented soul. Knowing how to suffer and sympathize, Tyutchev saw relief from grief in reading the Holy Scriptures. The poet knew the texts of the Bible well, as evidenced by direct quotations and paraphrases from the Gospel not only in many of his poems of the 1840s–1870s, but also in his letters. Tyutchev owned the Bible in Russian, passed down to him from his parents, and the poet, of course, understood the saving power of the Gospel texts. Sending the New Testament as a gift to his daughter Anna in 1861, the poet accompanied it with a poem that affirms the gracious help of the main book of Christianity: No, life has not defeated you, Never changed, my friend, Neither the truth of the heart, nor yourself. But all earthly forces are meager: And we, as if on the edge of the grave, Suddenly it will become terribly difficult. At these hours with love Remember about this book - And with all my soul, as if to the headboard, Come to her and rest. (2, 113) The image of the Mother of God is invisibly present in all of Tyutchev’s work, 202 giving the poetry that sublime, spiritual and philosophical character that all researchers of Tyutchev’s lyrics talk about. Kiseleva I.A. The idea of ​​the Kingdom in the poetic world of M.Yu. Lermontov ...the grace of God must dwell within us, in our hearts, for the Lord said: “The Kingdom of God is within you.” By the Kingdom of God, the Lord meant the grace of the Holy Spirit. From “Conversation between Elder Seraphim and N.A. Motovilov about the purpose of Christian life" Russia will undergo many troubles and at the cost of great suffering will gain great glory. She will unite the Orthodox Slavs into one mighty power, terrible for the enemies of Christ Prophecy of Rev. Seraphim of Sarov The idea of the Kingdom in Lermontov’s poetic world is closely intertwined with the confessional theme of his work. The confessional pathos of Lermontov's poetry is determined by the eschatologism of the worldview. The very concept of the Kingdom is eschatological. Both in spiritual and religious history and in the fabric of Lermontov’s creativity, the motif of confession is closely intertwined with the theme of God’s Judgment. In the lyrical monologue “I don’t want the world to know...” (1837), the poet, in his usual romantic manner of contrasting the lyrical hero with the “light” (“earthly city”), writes: How I loved, what I suffered for, The only judge of this is God and conscience!.. Their hearts will give an account of their feelings, He will ask them for regret; And may He punish me Who invented my torment... 203 Augustine Aurelius, discussing confession, said that “only in this highest state of self-knowledge can a person appreciate the justice of God” 204. Trial and confession are one of the most important categories of Lermontov’s religious and aesthetic worldview. But there is also God’s judgment, the confidants of depravity! There is a formidable Judgment: it awaits; It is not accessible to the ringing of gold, He knows thoughts and deeds in advance. (I, 9) It is no coincidence that the beginning of the poet’s wide literary fame is associated with these words. And in “The Prophet” (1841), Lermontov’s Lord appears as the “Eternal Judge.” Almost all of Lermontov's artistic heritage is akin to diary entries and sounds like a confession. His work was called the “confession of an intellectual” of the 30s of the 19th century. The confessional theme was embodied in the genres of prayer, lyrical diary, philosophical monologue, love letter, and romantic poem developed by Lermontov. Such pathos of his poetry is determined not only by the literary, mostly romantic tradition, but also by the poet’s rootedness in the practice of the Christian church. Having lost his mother Maria Mikhailovna Lermontova in childhood, whose death strengthened the religious sentiments of the space surrounding the child, who had a loving and religious grandmother as a godfather, Lermontov from childhood thought in terms of the categories of the Christian Orthodox world and, naturally, participated in the practice of the church. His regular confessions, which were not only everyday life, but also the existence of a Russian landowner’s estate, in the Church of Mary of Egypt, which became the tomb of his mother, also determined the leading idea of ​​his poetry - confession. The Venerable Mary of Egypt is a model of repentance; she is commemorated in the fifth week of Great Lent. Lermontov could not help but know her life; of course, he attended services where it was read. The place of confession and purification of the saint was the Egyptian desert. And the image-symbol of the desert as a place of spiritual quest and struggle of the hero is one of the leading ones in Lermontov’s poetic world. Thus, the original setting of the poem “The Demon” was one of the Egyptian monasteries; only then does the poet choose a monastery in the mountains of Georgia, where the action of another Lermontov masterpiece, Mtsyri, unfolds. The poems “Demon” and “Mtsyri” depict the battle of the human soul with dark, elemental and carnal forces. Lermontov’s desire for confession is great, like no other poet’s. Yu. Felsen noted that Lermontov always carried with him the weight of “some kind of continuous creative readiness and the need to immediately express and convey in vain.” The researcher drew attention to Lermontov’s literary feat, to the fact that the poet came to the opportunity to find words consonant with his condition “in the most difficult, probably the only way - through repeated attempts at partial and full confession...” 205. The confession of Lermontov's heroes is never connected with their visible repentance. But Lermontov is aware of the need to combine them. Thus, in the poem “Repentance” (1829), the girl who came to “confess the sin of her heart” does not receive forgiveness precisely because of the lack of repentance. In Lermontov, the moment of repentance is not directly and literally expressed, but it is realized in the figurative system of the text. No wonder A.B. Motorin believed that “Mtsyri” is “the confession of a Christian” 206. The ascetics retired to the desert not only to fulfill the commandments, but also to fight the devil, “not for a calm, peaceful, contemplative existence, but for a terrible battle with the prince of this world” 207. For Lermontov, it was creativity that was such a battle with dark forces. The very aesthetic moment of the unfolding of the action of his works in the Caucasus implies the poet’s repentant mood. Nicholas I, sending A.I. Polezhaev into exile, said: “I give you a means to cleanse yourself through military service. What do you want? “I must obey,” answered Polezhaev.”208 However, already in the poem “Repentance” (1832/33) Polezhaev wrote: But in the face of the Caucasus Mountains I tear unclean clothes 209. In the case of A.I. Odoevsky's sending him to the Caucasus was also the mercy of the emperor, touched by the poet's message to his father. The message was “presented to the sovereign by Count Benckendorff and he liked it so much that it was ordered that the Siberian settler from the deserted Ishim be transferred as an ordinary soldier to the Caucasus for his seniority” 210. In the poem “Cherkeshenka” (1829) Lermontov gives the following comparison: Having heard heavenly words, he flies... (I, 107) For Lermontov, the Caucasus Mountains are a symbol of purity and innocence, this is a special space where the air is pure, “like a child’s prayer.” Lermontov soulfully addresses the Caucasus Mountains: “You accustomed me to the sky, and since then I have been dreaming about you and the sky.” K.A. Kedrov writes that “in Lermontov’s mature lyrics, religious feeling often merges with poetic delight caused by the contemplation of the beauty of nature and the universe” 211. In “A Hero of Our Time”, in the last minutes before the fight - before the possibility of death! – Pechorin describes in his confession a beautiful mountain landscape: “All around, lost in the golden fog of the morning, the peaks of the mountains crowded together like a countless herd, and Elbrus in the south stood like a white mass, closing the chain of icy peaks...” (IV, 87). Here the tops of the rocks, likened to a countless flock, are associated with the host of the righteous, the obedient flock of Christ; this comparison is strengthened by the symbolic antithesis that follows almost immediately. Pechorin paints a gloomy picture: “I walked up to the edge of the platform and looked down, my head almost began to spin: down there it seemed dark and cold, like in a cellar: the mossy teeth of the rocks, thrown off by thunderstorms and time, were awaiting their prey...” (IV, 88). Naturally, an association arises with hell, where there is “darkness and gnashing of teeth.” And if in the first picture there is a moment of timelessness: the “golden fog of the morning” as eternal youth, then in the second picture the rocks are thrown away by “thunderstorm and time.” A situation is created between hell and heaven, and confession, as a sacrament, is the beginning of the path from the world of death to the world of life. Even in his early lyrical texts, Lermontov depicts these two worlds. The confessional beginning in the landscape allows the author to avoid the touch of “revelation.” In the preface to Pechorin's Journal, Lermontov writes that the famous “Confession” of J.J. Rousseau does not fully meet its purpose simply because the philosopher read it to his friends. For Lermontov, the problem of spiritual and emotional life is considered central. In Lermontov’s work there are always two people - external and internal: the external is evil, his existence is determined in relation to the dark empiricity of the world, but the internal in himself finds “another world and other images of existence.” B.T. Udodov writes that “one of the forms of revealing the contradiction of “internal” and “external” is the existence in Lermontov’s work of antipodal doubles within the boundaries of one consciousness - “There are two people in me...” and the so-called “paired” doubles: Vladimir Arbenin - Belinsky (“Strange Man”), Evgeny Arbenin - Neizvestny (“Masquerade”), Yuri Radin - Alexander Radin (“Two brother"), Grushnitsky - Pechorin (“Hero of Our Time”). Indeed, the image of Grushnitsky reveals the “external” plan of a person, while in the image of Pechorin the “external” conflict develops into an “internal” one, and the “external” plan serves as an indication of the world of the soul, which “dooms the hero to an exhausting struggle not only with his environment, but also with himself” 212. The first stage of any true knowledge of God, and Lermontov’s in particular, begins with self-knowledge, with an appeal to one’s “inner” person. The path to gaining the Kingdom of God is connected with overcoming the external, internal, material and spiritual. In the poem “N.F. And... oh” (1830), the poet wrote: Plunged deep into my heart, That my mind is not about trifles I was striving for something secret, To that for which they are given as collateral With a crowd of stars the night vaults, To what God promised us Through thoughts and years... (I, 121) Regarding the poem “In a difficult moment of life...” (1839), the Optina elder Barsanuphius said that “this is written about the Jesus Prayer.” The Jesus Prayer is the connection of the mind with the heart. It is worth noting that one of the books of young Lermontov was called “Children’s Reading for the Heart and Mind” (1818). In 1830, in “Excerpt” (1830), the poet writes: But having lost our homeland and freedom, I suddenly found myself, in myself alone Found salvation for an entire people... And drowned with an active mind. (I, 215) What kind of “active mind” does Lermontov mean? The “Jesus Prayer” is defined as “smart work” in patristic thought. Smart action is unceasing prayer, which St. Seraphim of Sarov also called for. In its completeness, it is possible only with the desire to free oneself from passions. In the Russian consciousness, to a fairly strong extent, the image of overcoming passions was formed on the basis of “The Ladder” by John Climacus. In his early work “Panorama of Moscow,” Lermontov compares the Kremlin to an altar on which “many sacrifices worthy of the Fatherland must be made, and have already been made...” It is interesting that the construction of the bell tower of Ivan the Great is connected with Boris Godunov’s project to erect a grandiose church in the Kremlin and call it “Holy of Holies”, following the example of the Church of King Solomon. It was on this spot that the famous bell tower grew in 1600, which serves in Lermontov’s text as a kind of Archimedean fulcrum. In the bell tower there is a church in the name of the abbot of Mount Sinai, John Climacus. In the preface to the “Ladder,” John Climacus is called “the newly revealed Moses,” and his book is likened to a ladder, which “Jacob, the champion of passions, saw when he rested on his ascetic bed” 213. The Temple of Solomon, like the expanses described by Lermontov, did not have a traditional dome; “the worshipers stood in the open air, mentally contemplating God in the heavenly dome” 214. The true earthly Jerusalem lived with the aspiration to be the Heavenly Jerusalem, just as Moscow lived with the aspiration to be the New Jerusalem, the Third Rome. An expression of this doctrine was the ensemble of the Moscow Kremlin, for the creation of which the Italians, the heirs of the First Rome, were specially invited. Lermontov’s teacher at Moscow University (he also studied with him at home) A.F. Merzlyakov, in one of his university speeches, proclaimed: “Let our boys awaken, soaring like a falcon in the sky, like a gray wolf through the dark oak forests. May the splendid reign of Northern Solomon, the Great Vladimir, be revived!” 215. In the Apostolic “Acts” it is written that “The Most High does not live in churches made with hands, as the prophet says: Heaven is my throne, and the earth is the footstool of my feet” (Acts 7:48–49). Only David, having found grace before God, prayed “to find a dwelling place for the God of Jacob. So Solomon built him a house” (Acts 7:46–47). In the poem “My House” (1830) Lermontov writes: My home is wherever there is a vault of heaven - Its roof reaches right up to the stars. And from one wall to another - A long way that measures A tenant not with his eyes, but with his soul. (I, 234) Empire implies a single centralized strong government. In “Panorama of Moscow” Lermontov focuses on just such Russian rulers: Peter I, Ivan the Terrible, Boris Godunov. The fourth pillar of the idea of ​​empire in an abstract sense is the Emperor Napoleon Bonaparte. Even in his early poem “Ishmael Bey” (1832), the poet, in the spirit of the aspirations of his generation, gives an interpretation of the historical future of Russia: Did they resist the weapons of the Slavs? And where by order of the Russian Tsar Treason and enmity did not submit? Humble yourself, Circassian! Both West and East, Perhaps your fate will soon be shared. The hour will come - and you yourself will say arrogantly: I may be a slave, but a slave to the king of the universe! The hour will come - and a new formidable Rome Will decorate the North with Augustus differently! (II, 56) Both Chaadaev and the Slavophiles saw the meaning of history not in facts, but in what is higher than them, in Revelation. The ideas of the monk Philotheus about Moscow - the Third Rome - the New Jerusalem were developed in the 19th century, who also lived by eschatological aspirations. In Lermontov's perception, Russia is connected with the Holy Land. In the margins of the manuscript of the poem “Mtsyri,” the poet makes sketches of the New Jerusalem Monastery, built by analogy with the complex in the Holy Land. No wonder it was A.N. Muravyov, who wrote both “Journey to the Holy Places in 1830” and “Journey to the Russian Holy Places,” where he compares New Jerusalem with the original, Lermontov reads the poem “Mtsyri” for the first time. In “Journey to the Holy Places in 1830” there is a small part devoted to the description of Gorny. A.N. Muravyov writes that this is “a wild and steep part of the Jerusalem mountains, located two hours west of Jerusalem” 216. In this part of Palestine is the Monastery of the Cross, which was founded in the 11th century by the Georgian king Bagrat III. A.N. Muravyov talks about his deplorable state at that time: “There are enough cells and meals, but now everything is empty; only two monks live there” 217. Let us remember that in Georgia, on a pointed mountain, right at the confluence of the Aragva and Kura Rivers, there was the ancient Georgian monastery of Jvaris-sakdari (Holy Cross). "Mtsyri" begins like this: Where, merging, they make noise, Hugging like two sisters, There was a monastery. From behind the mountain And the towers, and the church vault... Now there is one gray-haired old man, The guard of the ruins is half dead, Sweeps away dust from gravestones... (II, 59) In the history of Christianity, the symbol of the cross is closely connected with the personality of Constantine the Great - the first Christian ruler, the creator of Christian statehood. The cross was a symbol of his state power, an instrument of his victory. The Russian Chronograph of 1512 talks about the statue that was erected to Constantine in Constantinople, it was “an image of a human copper, at the head of seven rays, which you brought from the Solar City of the Frugian country, and put an honest cross on the hand of the image, writing on it: “To you, Christ, I give this city”” 218 . In the service to Constantine and Helena it is sung: “Thou hast given a mighty weapon to our king, Thy honorable cross, through whom Thou hast reigned righteously on earth, having shone forth in piety, and made the Kingdom of Heaven worthy of Thy mercy; with the same Thy humane vision we glorify, O Jesus, Omnipotent Savior of our souls.” 219 It is interesting that the “Life of Constantine and Helena” is told. about how a “coward” happened under Emperor Heraclius and the cross was stolen by the Persians, and then recaptured by the same emperor by A.B. Motorin writes about Pechorin, who, in contrast to Mtsyri, meets death three times, and dies the fourth time, while the hero of the poem returns to the monastery, where he passes into another world (however, A.B. Motorin does not recognize this moment of Mtsyri’s death, believing that he remains alive: otherwise who would tell us a confession that bears the stamp of mystery). But the important fact is that Pechorin “died” precisely “on the way to Persia,” which can be considered as the intention of “returning” the saving cross, or at least an indication of this. One of the crosses of Constantine, the one with which the king went against his enemies, was kept on Mount Athos in the Greek Vatopedi monastery, and in 1655, during the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich, it was brought to Moscow along with the head of John the Baptist. It is remarkable that in Gornaya, not far from the place where the tree from which the Cross of the Lord was made once grew, “the priest Zechariah lived until the day of the massacre of the infants” (according to the narrative of A.N. Muravyov). Here the baby John was born. “According to Palestinian legends, the angry Herod ordered to kill him, not finding Jesus, and the elderly wife Elizabeth disappeared into the desert with the baby John” 220. According to the story by A.N. Muravyova, the cave where the baby John took refuge, “is carved into a half-mountain above a wild ravine,” here “John was nourished by that divine spirit that he poured out in the gospel throughout Palestine,” this desert, “like the threshold of the Jordan, is similar for us to those cleansing prayers that renounce the temptations of the world even before the sacrament is performed; for John himself here was sanctified in spirit and cleansed the nations with repentance before he drew them to the Jordan” 221. In the Jordan River, John the Baptist baptized with water and waited for the One who would baptize with the Holy Spirit. O.P. Ilyinsky, in an article about “Mtsyri,” talks about the imperial character of the poem, associated with the idea of ​​annexing Georgia, which is why the image of General Ermolov appears in the poem. The very image of Mtsyri is likened to Christ, on whose head a crown of thorns was put: In vain I hid in the grass He curled up, and there was fire in his face The earth itself breathed to me. (II, 68) The next chapter contains a dying vision of a goldfish, and in the first version, the end of the chapter was followed by a description of a whirlwind of “new dreams”: Whirling up the ashes, it flies towards me; Behind him is another, and a whole row... And everyone, leaning from his horse, Threw a full look of contempt On my monastic outfit... My father was the last to go... And he began to call me with him, Beckoning with a mighty hand. (II, 356) Mtsyri does not answer the call of his blood father, but in the following verses he acknowledges the paternity of the old monk who saved him from “death”: “Farewell, father... give me your hand.” Mtsyri does not extend his hand to his blood father, but asks for the hand of his spiritual father, thereby placing the call of the spirit above the call of the flesh. The image of galloping horsemen from the poem is associated with the image of an Arab from the poem “Three Palms”, where the following picture appears: And, leaning towards the bow, The Arab was hot on the black horse. And the horse reared up at times, And he jumped like a leopard struck by an arrow; And white clothes have beautiful folds On the shoulders of the faris curled in disarray... (I, 29) In "Mtsyri" each rider has a "steel helmet wrapped in a white cap." These images again resurrect in memory the promised land, which, as Lermontov’s friend A.N. Muravyov, “now in the hands of careless Arabs and under the iron scepter of the Musselims” 222. The image of John the Baptist in world history acts as a symbol of the border; he became a harbinger of the One who, “trampling down death by death,” turned the world to a new existence. The Gospel says about the Forerunner: “Of those born of women there is not a single prophet greater than John the Baptist, but the least in the Kingdom of God is greater than him” (Luke 7:28). It stands on the verge of times - Old and New. And often the gate church of a monastery was built in his honor; he symbolizes the beginning of the path to the Kingdom of God. “At the gates of the holy monastery,” near the gate of John the Baptist Trinity-Sergius Lavra, the action of Lermontov’s poem “The Beggar” unfolds. “Are you the One who is to come, or should we expect something else?” – the Forerunner sent “two of his disciples” to ask Jesus. In response, the Lord said to them: “Go, tell John what you have seen and heard: the blind receive their sight, the lame walk, lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, the poor are preached the good news” (Luke 7:19-22). In Christian practice, a miracle plays the role of evidence of a change in the essence of the world. The idea of ​​establishing the Kingdom is also contained in Lermontov’s poem “Tamara” (1841). In the context of the literature of that time, it acquires a high semantic load. In the poem “The Marriage of Georgia with the Russian Kingdom” (1838), Lermontov’s colleague Prince A.I. Odoevsky writes in allegorical form about the event of Georgia’s entry into Russia: I kept looking into the distance, listening to all the sounds, There, near Kazbek in the Daryala gorge, I met him in sweet delight She rushed violently into her arms and fell Gently on your groom's chest. She accepted the thought and became all bright 223. A.I. Odoevsky compares Russia with a “giant groom,” while Georgia appears as a girl with eyes “full of passion and fire.” In "Vadim" Lermontov calls Russia a giant, as in the poem "Two Giants" (1832). Lermontovskaya Tamara, like the heroine of the poem by A.I. Odoevsky, awaits the “suitors” in the “deep gorge of Daryal, / Where the Terek rummages in the darkness.” Frequent interlocutor of Lermontov A.N. Muravyov in his book “Georgia and Armenia” (1848) (recalling Lermontov’s poem “The Dispute” (1841) with its pan-Slavic idea) writes that Lermontov’s grave was approximately in the same place, not far from Elbrus and Kazbek. According to his information, “David the Renewer is credited with the construction of the first Cross here,” 224 both being a symbol of the Kingdom of Heaven and Christian statehood. The very name of Tamara (translated as palm branch) is associated with the idea of ​​the Kingdom: the Jews threw palm branches at the Lord’s entry into Jerusalem, welcoming Him as King. The name of Queen Tamara in the Georgian national worldview is associated with the strengthening of Georgian Orthodox statehood. In “History of the Russian State” N.M. Karamzin, novel by A.A. Shishkov’s “Ketevana, or Georgia in 1812” (1835), she is depicted as an ideal ruler who was distinguished by her intelligence and chastity. The death of the young men during a night of love with the queen can be considered as a sacrifice of Russian soldiers in the name of strengthening the state. The general mood of the poem, associated with the value superiority of love over death, does not contradict such content. But for Lermontov in 1841, the spiritual interpretation of the poem is more acceptable, because it corresponds to his general worldview. At the beginning of the 19th century, society lived with eschatological aspirations, and the very idea of ​​Moscow - the Third Rome was illuminated with an apocalyptic light. This is an era associated with the star of Napoleon, who, among his many associations, also had the image of the Antichrist. G.R. Derzhavin exclaims in one of his works: “O new Babylon, Paris.” It was at this time that the “Russian idea” with its trinity was formed: Autocracy, Orthodoxy, Nationality. The thought of A.A. is connected with the 1830s. Ivanov to paint the painting “The Appearance of Christ to the People.” As the subject for his painting, the artist, who lived in Rome at that time, chooses an event that stands at the turn of the Old and New Testaments, when the last prophet meets the Messiah with the people. At this moment A.A. Ivanov “saw the essence of the entire Gospel” 225. The Gospel of Mark says: “And a voice came from heaven: You are my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. And immediately after that the Spirit leads Him into the wilderness... And He was there in the wilderness for forty days, tempted by Satan and was with the beasts; and Angels served Him. After John was betrayed, Jesus came to Galilee, preaching the Gospel of the Kingdom of God. And saying that the time is fulfilled and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent and believe in the gospel” (Mark 1:11-15). The idea of ​​the Kingdom is organically connected with apocalyptic expectations; the concept of the King is eschatological. In the film A.A. Ivanov has John the Baptist in the foreground, although the image of the Forerunner is not the purpose of the painting. We see something similar in Lermontov. The poet, of course, heard about Ivanov’s painting, being himself a good artist and being in close communication with contemporary artists, for example, with Prince G.G. Gagarin, who in the 1820s studied in Rome with Horace Vernet and K.P. Bryullov. The first meetings of G.G. Gagarin and Lermontov date back to 1834. In 1840, being officers of the same regiment, they, according to Mongo-Stolypin, lived in the same tent, and they even completed several watercolors on military themes together, which indicates friendly relations and mutual understanding; G.G. Gagarin illustrated some of Lermontov’s texts both during the poet’s life and after his death. The very idea that inspired A.A. Ivanova and occupying Lermontov, rushed in the air. And if the famous author of “The Appearance of Christ to the People” exclaimed about the construction of the Cathedral of Christ the Savior: “Compatriots, work for the glory of God. “Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand” 226, then Lermontov also lives with the thought of repentance. And the image of John the Baptist calling the Israeli people to repentance, which symbolically in the Christian consciousness indicates the idea of ​​the Kingdom, is given by Lermontov, albeit indirectly, but in the foreground, in dense verbal painting, while the image of Christ is only visible, artists contemplate Him with distant vision, which is characterized by a chaste perception of the space separating the eye from the object. We see the same thing with A.A. Ivanova. Above we talked about the function of the landscape in Lermontov’s poem “Mtsyri”. I.N. Kramskoy, in his article “About Ivanov,” sees the artist’s reformatory value in depicting the entire scene “really in the air and really in the landscape.” “All the old artists,” he continues, “depicting their events, calmly painted their figures in room lighting” 227. Lermontov takes the spiritual struggle of a person seeking God out of the monastic cell into open space, presenting the picture “really in the air and really in the landscape,” which is due to the general mood of the 1830s, when Gogol, on whose name day Lermontov first publicly read the poem “Mtsyri,” exclaimed: “Your monastery is Russia.” G.P. Florovsky believed that “Dead Souls” was written “about the public good... And it was the utopia of the sacred Kingdom”, connected “with the spirit of the “Holy Union”, with the ideology of Alexander’s times and the “pure ministry” 228. When in 1858 the painting by A.A. Ivanova was exhibited for the Russian audience; she already corresponded to a moderate degree with the mentality of that time. Gogol with his “Selected Places...” was not accepted either. According to G. P. Florovsky, only people of Alexander’s time liked them. John the Baptist is the forerunner of the appearance of the Kingdom of God; the transfer of his head from Mount Athos to Russian soil in the 17th century (together with the Cross of Constantine) was perceived as a “symbol of the coming victory and salvation”, as a guarantee of God’s chosenness of Russian royal power. It is symbolic that in the gateway Church of the Nativity of John the Baptist in the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, upon entering we are greeted by an icon of Saints Constantine and Helen standing at the Cross on which the Lord was crucified. According to Saint Hippolytus of Rome, John the Baptist, having suffered death from Herod, was the first to announce Christ, and to those who were in hell, “he became the forerunner there too, signifying that the Savior would go there too to deliver the souls of the saints from the hands of death” 229. Saint Hippolytus reasons: Christ “was declared the King of heaven, earth and hell and the judge of all...” 230. John Chrysostom writes that “ahead of His (sign) of the second coming of the Son of Man – the cross – the Archangel Michael will sound the trumpet and awaken those who have fallen asleep from Abraham until the end of the century” 231. The images of Michael the Archangel and John the Baptist have, in a sense, similar functions, primarily related to the idea of ​​the Kingdom. The most “transparent” version of the phenomenon in Lermontov’s work is the image of the Archangel Michael in the poem “Battle” (1832), where the Archangel is depicted on a white horse, “hung with silver fringes,” as a “young” warrior fighting with a black enemy on a black horse and defeating him. In “Ishmael Bey” (1832), the poet writes that Russia, as “a new formidable Rome / Will adorn the North with another Augustus.” The first half of the 19th century was characterized by an atmosphere of eschatologism, which was manifested in both literature and art. Such a worldview entails the idea of ​​God's chosenness and messianism. The idea of ​​a sacred state, which Russia inherited from Byzantium, largely determined the self-awareness of Lermontov, who saw in Alexander I the “new Augustus.” The poet perceives earthly history as part of divine history. He appears as a person who has a keen sense of time, who has the ability to express and convey a certain “inner”, true and in this sense divine word about what is happening. In his work, Lermontov appears as a man of the Russian Christian world with his spiritual maximalism. And the cherished idea of ​​Russian Orthodoxy - the idea of ​​Moscow - the Third Rome becomes the most important point in the formation of its worldview. Averyanova M.A. Comprehension of H.V. Gogol's secrets of deification The question of why Russian writers cannot limit themselves to the framework of aesthetic canons and create according to the laws of the genre is asked by every thoughtful reader and researcher. Why is Pushkin, Gogol, Dostoevsky, each of them a new aesthetics and a new school, however, deeply rooted? The testimony of writers about the creativity of their fellow writers is a most valuable source that lifts the mysterious veil of writer's pain and pleasure. I.S. Shmelev - the Russian “poet of world sorrow” 232 - uttered the secret of Pushkin, Gogol, Dostoevsky. In a conversation with N. Gorodetskaya I.S. Shmelev, explaining his long-suffering experience, uttered pearl words about the anguish and torment of our writers. “I.S. sits on the sofa, he will jump up, go to the table, shake the ashes from the cigarette and suddenly stop in the middle of the room, wave his hand and say - almost shout in a low, dull voice: – A new aesthetics is needed... Of course, not for the sake of schools and the imposition of artificial and compulsory styles and forms - do people still have the conscience to talk about this? – talent will always go its own way. But for the sake of creating that artistic atmosphere, which is of great importance for the writer. How do you understand about art? Art – what is it? We must understand our enormous responsibility. Remember Gogol? I understood, found out what source he came from, what spirit and calling - and saw that he had committed a sin: he touched a “garbage pit”, even though he took pearls from there! - I was horrified. But he could, which others were not given. He could have fallen flat and hit the old man’s feet. Knew repentance. And Dostoevsky knew. He carried the abyss within himself - the ideal of both Sodom and the Madonna - but he overcame it with the power of repentance and his suffering. – Suffering will transform and redeem everything. It turns out: sodom is a temptation... Here are the words: temptation - art, art. Accept passion, accept temptation - and put it through yourself, suffer and, having experienced, been tempted - go into art, sophisticated and purified... They are trying to present Pushkin to non-believers. He had not yet figured out himself, but he was moving towards God and even towards Orthodoxy. And he knew the great meaning of words. Welcome! Today everything is elementary for us: “I awakened good feelings with the lyre.” But he was the smartest man, and he wasn’t afraid of the elementary. “By the command of God, O muse, be obedient.” We are not talking about inspiration here, but about God’s voice. And therefore, whoever does not hear such a voice has no need to write. When I talk about a new aesthetics, this is how I understand it: we need to ADORE art, understand that art, like religion, comes from one - divine - source... But what is it... Pushkin said it all in The Prophet. Coal, blazing with fire... Is it okay that I talk so much? I kept silent about it and thought about it and it really hurt me... <...> It's hard to see the fuss and read and listen to the arguments. I was drawn to silence. Here I am writing, “The Summer of the Lord is favorable.” Holidays and how they were reflected in everyday life, and their rhythm and deep meaning in everything: spiritual, divine, and cosmic, and the soulfulness of the people... But one thing cannot, cannot be forgotten. All of humanity is in danger of departing from its Godly image, and we are all debtors to Him... Don’t be offended by me - I say such simple things. Don’t think that I’m giving you instructions. I suffer a lot from all this...” 233. “Repentance”, “suffering”, “knowledge of the great meaning of words”, the desire to “deify art”, the pain of the loss of the image of God by man and the acquisition of “quietness” - the mystery-sacrament of Russian writers. All these topics are the suffering of the writer's field. Gogol, Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, Shmelev suffered from them. And in this inescapable torment lies the continuity of the Russian spirit - inquisitive and daring, meek and humble. Here two elements of the human heart meet - spirituality and sincerity, refracted in the experience of the writer's personality. Creativity N.V. Gogol - “the martyr of sublime thought and an insoluble task” 234 - is most expressive in his “beyondness”. And this “beyondness” is expressed primarily in Gogol’s ability not only to weave artistic reality, perceiving it sensually and spiritually, but most importantly, in the ability to convey spiritual reality, which can only be expressed through one’s own soul, through personal perception. Gogol, a secular, worldly writer, spoke about the spiritual in his works. But the spiritual here must be understood not as some abstract knowledge about beauty, goodness, love, which was characteristic of the Enlightenment age, but as real living according to the commandments of God. The path of Gogol’s comprehension of the mystery of deification lies in the themes “Life”, “Death”, “Resurrection”, which run like a leitmotif through all of his work. It is the solution of these themes-problems that is fundamental in the life-creativity-death of a writer. A characteristic technique for Gogol is a description of noisy fun, ending with a lyrical reflection on the transience of life, many researchers have noted. This is memento mori - Gogol’s unique style. It would be wrong to explain it by a gloomy worldview or any mental anomalies. Here is a completely healthy, joyful, Orthodox perception of life, which does not end in death. Here, for example, is an episode from “Dead Souls” in which Gogol, characterizing the mayor’s ball, sneers at women’s attire. The description ends with the phrase: “Only in places, some kind of cap, unprecedented on earth, or even some kind of almost peacock feather suddenly stuck out, contrary to all fashions, according to one’s own taste. But it’s impossible without this, such is the nature of a provincial city: it will certainly break down somewhere” 235 . There is not only irony here, but also a warning: a thread, a life, can be cut short. And the mention of a cap, the headdress of elderly ladies, and a feather, a symbol of death, is not accidental. It is interesting that the word tear off (common Slavic) has the same root as ditch, dig. And again memento mori, although the next sentence follows Chichikov’s reflection on the writer of the mysterious letter, the contents of which least of all resemble a love letter: That she died in tears 236. The thought of life is adjacent to the thought of death. The theme of death in Gogol arises so realistically that it almost cannot be separated from life. Death is woven into life because it is not the end. The premonition of something new, different, not similar to the earthly, can be read especially in the late Gogol. Thus, in the book “Selected Passages from Correspondence with Friends,” Gogol wrote 237: “Other things are coming for poetry. It is still a mystery - this inexplicable revelry, which is heard in our songs, rushes somewhere past life and the song itself, as if burning with the desire for a better homeland, for which man has been yearning since the day of his creation. Still a mystery for many is this extraordinary lyricism - the birth of a supreme sobriety of mind - which comes from our church songs and canons and as long as it just as unconsciously elevates the spirit of the poet as the native sounds of our song unconsciously wash away his heart" 238 . “The birth of supreme sobriety of mind” prepares a person for the perception of the Divine, just like the desire of J.S. Shmelev to “quietness” gives birth to “The Auspicious Summer of the Lord,” where “Joys,” “Holidays,” and “Sorrows” are woven with a single thread into the beautiful fabric of the novel. Gogol's last book, “Reflections on the Divine Liturgy,” unknown to his contemporaries, was revealed to posterity 239 . And another interesting episode illustrating this idea is the story of soldier Vladimir, our contemporary: “I have been an orphan since childhood. I was raised by an old nun who taught me the Orthodox faith and was herself a spiritual ascetic. After her death, I lived with relatives. Then he went to serve in the army, where he was a cook. One day I dreamed about my late mother and said: – Servant of God Vladimir, you will fall asleep for a long time during Peter’s Fast. Tell your commander not to do anything to you or bury you. When I woke up, I didn’t tell anyone about my dream, fearing the ridicule of my comrades. On the second night the dream repeated itself, and I told my friend about it. He advised not to go anywhere and not to tell anyone. On the third night, the old woman appeared again and severely punished: “If you don’t say it, they’ll bury you in the ground and you’ll really die.” When I woke up, I immediately went to the commander and told him everything. He calmly listened to me and sent me to the medical unit. The feast of the holy apostles Peter and Paul was approaching. Anxiety and excitement did not leave me. My comrades joked with me. But then this day came. From early morning until lunchtime I cooked food. I didn't eat anything myself. Everyone was waiting for what would happen to me, but nothing happened to me for half a day. Doubts crept into my soul. Suddenly I felt sleepy and immediately lay down on the boards. And this is what happened to me. I stood up, but in a different form and light, and next to me lay my almost lifeless body. I looked at myself in surprise, and everyone was making noise: The commander and the doctor approached and tried to unbutton his shirt to perform artificial respiration. I saw how hopelessly my chest was massaged, how my comrades carried my body to the medical unit room. At that time, some unknown force lifted me above the ground to heaven, where I met my mother, who invited me to follow her. We walked, and a new life of people who once lived on earth was revealed to me. I saw my relatives, acquaintances, and even leaders whom I recognized from earthly portraits. There was a lot of light in the heavenly villages. I saw virgins, separately monks, married ones, but only in different glory. Some had one crown on their head, others had two crowns. And everyone was happy, joyful, and praised the Lord. I saw the writer Gogol there, whose books I read as a child. Then I was shown hellish dungeons, where sinners detained at ordeals suffer, tormented by evil spirits until the Last Judgment of God. After five days of my heavenly journey, I woke up. Now I go and talk to people about God, about the soul, about the afterlife, the bliss of the righteous and the torment of sinners” 240. Here too is life, death, resurrection... and Gogol, whose personality is mysteriously inscribed in the Book of Life. Zverev V.P. Mother of God motifs in the poetic works of F.N. Glinka Given the general spiritual orientation of creativity and the original religiosity of F.N. Glinka’s image of the Most Holy Theotokos did not immediately acquire that unusually significant and special place, which is now obvious when looking at the poet’s poetic heritage and life. Thus, of the 50 poems included in the collection “Experiences in Sacred Poetry” (St. Petersburg, 1826), only one is dedicated to the Queen of Heaven - “The Virgin Soother of Sorrows”, and at first it was associated primarily with the deep lyrical feeling of the author - a spiritual experience bordering on ecstatic despair: When torn apart by sadness And, with his head buried in the dust, When my chest is half dead And I, a victim of passions and storms, And torment was my answer... 241 The mournful, hysterical state, the hopeless situation of the lyrical hero does not find a sympathetic response in the earthly world, and there is no solution for them in the mysterious decisions of fate. But unexpectedly, in the poem, such a desperate mood is replaced by joyful enlightenment, the soul is illuminated by divine Grace, comes to life and ascends to the cherished heavens: I suddenly heard the sounds of life And they brightened above me, Like Grace, like eternal peace, It is there, in the heavenly vale, for the lyrical hero, freed from the corruption of human existence and removed from earthly suffering, that divinely inspired rejoicing begins: My spirit, on unearthly wings, Having left here his perishable composition, He flew, rejoicing, to the heights... However, the sublime soaring and jubilation of the spirit suddenly freezes - a majestic picture of the appearance of the Queen of Heaven - the Most Holy Theotokos - appears before the inner gaze of the lyrical hero. Despite the involuntary awe he feels before the divine mystery, the poet with reverence and at the same time with artistic precision conveys the most detailed details of the wonderful vision that was revealed to his spirit in the heavenly heights: In the radiance of the starry crown: The diamond scepter burned in the right hand, You were all full of light, And from Your holy clothing, Hopes fell like sparks, And the world is like a delicate aroma, Flowed into the revolt of earthly passions... Of course, here the poet describes the spiritual intoxication he experienced with the Grace descended from the Most Holy Theotokos; the spirit of the author of the poem is unfeignedly filled with heavenly joy and prayerful humility: Embraced by sacred awe, How sweetly he prayed to You, My spirit; and like in your native forest The turtledove brings food to the chicks, So I, abandoned and poor, He brought joy from You. The image of the lyrical hero, “torn by earthly melancholy,” in whose chest “the fire of sorrow burned,” changes by the end of the poem. After a prayerful appeal to the Most Holy Theotokos, a satisfying enlightenment occurs in his soul and life: It’s as if I wasn’t the one being tormented! The dream fades with gloomy sadness, And the familiar groan became alien to me! Now the attitude, earthly existence and fate of the lyrical hero of the poem by F.N. Glinka is already unthinkable without the image of the Mother of God - the Most Holy Virgin, the Soother of Sorrows: She feeds his soul with heavenly Grace: In the chest quenched by You, Your sacred image shines, And heaven descends into the soul... The image of the Mother of God in the minds of every believer seems quite definite and spiritually filled, but in the biblical canonical traditions it is devoid of detailed historical and biographical specifics, which is inherent in many other sacred characters. All this creates certain difficulties when translating it into artistic creativity or even into theological interpretations. Apparently, this is why the “Complete Orthodox Theological Encyclopedic Dictionary” contains extremely meager information about the Blessed Virgin Mary: “Mother of the Lord I. Christ, daughter of the righteous Joachim and Anna” 242 . However, in the 19th century, Archimandrite Nikifor (in the world - Alexey Bazhanov, 1832–1895) in the “Illustrated Complete Popular Biblical Encyclopedia,” strictly following the data given about the life and dormition of the Mother of God in the texts of the Holy Scriptures, still goes beyond the scope of the canonical presentation. Having reached the story of the crucifixion of the Savior, he recalls the prophecy of the God-Receiver Simeon addressed to the Blessed Virgin, which is mentioned in the Gospel of Luke (2:35), and makes a rather emotional rhetorical conclusion: “During the Lord’s suffering on the cross, the prophecy of Simeon, once addressed to Her, was fulfilled in all its power: “And a weapon will pierce your own soul.” And indeed, who could describe Her fierce sorrow and mental anguish at this inexpressible terrible sight! 243. This rhetorical exclamation can be regarded not only as a demand for the highest visual and expressive abilities from artists who would try to embody this event through the means of their art, but also as the immutable desire of every person to penetrate beyond the boundaries of the mystery of the Holy Scriptures and get closer to the majestic and incomprehensible to human understanding images of ancient holiness. Of course, there are miraculous phenomena in reality and in dreams, artists of various types of art give specific features to sacred images - in the mysterious and creatively embodied artistic world, the images of biblical stories acquire, as it were, a new life, closer to modern conditions, without losing their involvement in the eternal divine source. In the works of F.N. Glinka can trace a variety of attempts that reveal the underlying reasons for the writer’s turn to the embodiment of the image of the Mother of God, especially revered in Rus'. As a churchgoer and pious man of the 19th century, Fyodor Nikolaevich from childhood more than once resorted to prayer requests to the Blessed Virgin Mary, standing in front of Her icon face. She also appears to him as the Queen of Heaven in his dreams, the most important of which he had the custom of writing down. This is, for example, a vision he had in a dream: “The Mother of God, crowned with a crown and stars, will sit on the throne. The words: “And over Africa, over Africa, this will prevail and the hard hearts of these peoples will be enlightened, softened and anointed.” 244 Another time, Fyodor Nikolaevich precedes the recording of a dream entitled “Queen of Glory” with a drawing depicting Jesus Christ and the Mother of God, and accompanies it with a pictorial, descriptive text: “The entire outline (outline) of the Mother of God and Jesus Christ is made of light golden stars. On the head of M B there is a silver moon, and on the forehead of Jesus Christ there is a golden sun. Mother of God on the clouds. At her feet and around her are all two-winged angels and cherubs” 245. In this description of the dream, there are clearly allusions to the image of the Queen of Heaven, revealed to the lyrical hero of the poem “The Virgin Soother of Sorrows.” “I saw something seemingly allegorical,” records F.N. Glinka has his next dream, which is like a visual illustration of a theological judgment. – The Lord sent down His Spirit on man. The Blessed Virgin, on the left, was praying, and on the right, Jesus, who at first seemed small, suddenly began to grow and grow and finally reached his head to the sky. It says here: “And Jesus will be magnified and will grow and exalt himself so that, without leaving the ground with his feet, he will touch the Father above all worlds with his head on the theme of the Universe. – And Jesus will be a guide from heaven to earth; and Jesus will be like a kind of rainbow, bringing down the heavenly into the earthly, and the Spirit under the arc from the Son to the Father and from the Father to the Son, like the firmament. – And thus humanity will be protected! – And the Blessed Virgin, on the left side, instills the same love for people and cares about them. Amen!"" 246. All these pictures revealed by F.N. Glinka during dreams, then received their embodiment in poetic form, taking on the poetic flesh of a literary text. The poem “Prayer to the Blessed Virgin” (“You are floating in the clouds...”) can be evidence of this. It uses pictorial features that were characteristic of the images recorded by the poet in the recordings of his dreams: In front of such a graphic image of the Virgin Mary, inspired by F.N. Glinka with bright dreams and a picturesque sacred icon face, in fact, begins the prayer of the poet, suffering not only about his sad fate, but also about the sad earthly fate of every sinful person: The poet’s prayer ends with an invocation to the Most Holy Theotokos to save him from the “steep waves of life” that have played out and grant him peace and tranquility: The poet’s gaze is also turned to the sacred face of the Virgin Mother in another poem with the same title, “Prayer to the Blessed Virgin” (“Between the sun and the moon...”). It is characteristic that here, too, the purely individual requests of the lyrical hero and his awareness of the sinfulness of his earthly life are inseparable from universal ones, as a result of which the personal prayer appeal acquires a conciliar character and a sublime generalized meaning: In the bowl of earthly happiness, Please comfort us who are sad in grief, Along with the poet’s actual prayerful appeal to the Most Holy Theotokos, not only a sacred, but also a romantically poeticized image of Her appears in his writings, as, for example, in the short poem “To the Most Holy Virgin” consisting of two quatrains: Like in the morning in silver clouds So in the glow you shine pure The edges of Your radiant garments And droplets from silky fabrics Healing oil of life! 248 Such a sublimely poetic perception of the Mother of God did not interfere with F.N. Glinka created works in which the image of the Blessed Virgin organically fit into the life of the author himself. In the poem “Before the Virgin Mother, having lit the lamp...” the icon of the Mother of God is initially perceived on a worldly, real-life level: Before the Virgin Mother, having lit the lamp, And he said: “Holy! I feel cramped and sad” – And he opened his heart to Her... My lamp shone brightly And the crown on the Virgin flashed, In her hands the Holy Child was holding, And He pressed His head to Her. However, gradually the space of the poem is filled with mysterious life, and in the imagination of the lyrical hero a sacred voice, inaudible to earthly ears, begins to sound, imbued with compassion for sinful earthly people: And, it seemed, He whispered touchingly to the Most Pure One: Tell him. - People there are cramped and sad, So we need to console them!” Following the touching request uttered in the quiet, humble voice of the Child Jesus, a reasonable and sublime response from the Most Holy Theotokos sounds, in which one can hear the edifying and moralizing notes that are so characteristic of the didactic tone of many of F.N.’s spiritual works. Glinka: And, it seemed, the Saint proclaimed this: “They have the Comforter in their eyes! He was crucified by them and died for them With love, with prayer on your lips They are sad because of their own sins and vices, They feel cramped because of their own passions: I feel sorry for them, but the sad murmur of madmen - The senseless murmur of children!... Let all the torments of the earth gather together, All grief, all sorrow in one: They will plunge into cross flour Like a drop of abyss to the bottom! 249. This, of course, is not an exceptional case when, even in a small poetic work, the rhetoric of the poet himself, prone to moralizing sermons, is transferred to the biblical realm, the sacred sacrament of which gives the author’s gracious plan a special power of persuasiveness. So closely connected and intertwined in the poetry of F.N. Glinka: earthly and heavenly, human and divine. And the image of the Mother of God, most holy and especially revered by the poet, in its literary embodiment acquires in him features that are so understandable to every sinner on this earth. Apparently, therefore, it is no coincidence that in the poetic heritage of F.N. Glinka’s special place is occupied by the images of the Mother of God, the closest to the Orthodox Russian person, evoking special tenderness and compassion in his heart - the Joy of All Who Sorrow, the Soother of Sorrows and the Helper of Sinners. The poem “Comforter of All Who Sorrow” sounds like a prayerful lament addressed to the Mother of God, consisting of twelve tercets: From Your prayer to the Eternal Under Your holy robe, - All, being friends with united love, You keep, with a protective hand, You walk like a peaceful Queen, You pour out sacred silence, Taking pity on our fate, You walk with a healing cup, You wear precious suits, Extinguish the sultry passions in us And the path is slippery, not slippery, Lead us, you who pray for us, We will remove Your Face with roses, You, daytime and evening, Having heeded the prayers, remove the thorns from us, It can be assumed that F.N. Glinka responded with his poems about the Mother of God and to living evidence of the appearance of miraculous icons. It is quite possible that the poem “To the Mother of God Sporuchnitsa” has a direct connection with a real event that occurred in the St. Nicholas Odrina Monastery of the Oryol diocese, when a miracle was revealed from the icon. “As far as we know, the icon of the Mother of God “Helper of Sinners” was first glorified in the St. Nicholas Odrina Monastery of the Oryol diocese. Here the icon was in obscurity and in inattention for a long time. It stood between other icons in a dilapidated chapel near the gate behind the monastery and was so faded and covered with dust that it was impossible to read the inscriptions on it. In the summer of 1844, the wife of the merchant Pochepin came to the Odrin Monastery with her two-year-old son Timothy, who was suffering greatly from seizures that no one could not only cure, but even alleviate, and after the liturgy she asked to serve a prayer service before the icon of the Mother of God “Helper of Sinners” that stood in the chapel. A prayer service was served, and the sick son recovered. After this miracle, the icon was taken from the chapel, washed and placed in the monastery in a decent place. Other miraculous signs soon followed from this icon, and from then on the icon of the Mother of God “Support of Sinners” in the St. Nicholas Odrina Monastery became famous for miracles” 251. It is quite possible that F.N. Glinka was informed by someone about these wonderful events. Perhaps it is no coincidence that the opening quatrains of the poet’s work sound like a response to them: There are no words in our mouths, Walks with a word of peace My brothers and people are their torment Torture of passions alien to us: I will be for the poor children!”... 252 About miraculous signs coming from the icon of the Mother of God “Support of Sinners”, F.N. Glinka could have learned from the rector of the Intercession Cathedral in the city of Orel, Archpriest E.A. Ostromyslensky (1803–1887), with whom he was on friendly terms and corresponded for many years. The poet maintained his connection with the Oryol land and interest in the events taking place there for a long time, despite his short and forced stay there in 1833–1834 “in addition to being an adviser” to the provincial government. At the same time, there is no doubt that this poem dates back to the period of the Crimean (Eastern) War of 1853–1856, when F.N. Glinka also composed the famous “Hurray!” (“Hurray!.. Let’s hit three at once...”), published as a separate illustrated edition in 1854. A prayer appeal to the Mother of God for the Fatherland in danger, for which “our Russian is fighting with three,” toponymic signs of historical battles, details of real military events - everything here is intertwined into a single religious and patriotic impulse of the poet’s soul: Our Russian is fighting with three! Beats, - the chest has strengthened with faith, - In the flame with the flame of love; Look, have pity, Most Holy One! Warfare destroys and destroys everything!... Our enemy is building and installing Turning to the image of the Mother of God as an unshakable spiritual and real support, an intercessor in difficult moments of personal life and in sorrowful days of the native Orthodox state is traditional for Russian people. Fyodor Nikolaevich’s wife Avdotya Pavlovna Glinka, in the preface to her popular book in the 19th century, “The Life of the Blessed Virgin Mary according to the Books of the Chetya-Mineaia,” noted: “How can wives raised in the Orthodox Church not please the Most Pure Mother of the Lord? Our Fatherland is filled with signs of Her mercies. Let us not talk about those innumerable deliverances from troubles, healings and consolations poured out by the hand of the Mother of God, which are hidden from the world and known only to God and those who receive them. Let us turn our gaze to those bright spots on our earth that are illuminated by especially bright and abundant rays of the good deeds of the Queen of Heaven, to those many places where Her miraculous face appeared. How many thousands of sufferers received relief and healing there from serious and often incurable diseases; they came to Her holy image with a heart torn by sadness and returned from it with peace and joy in their souls! With what power was weakened faith aroused there, doubts were overcome, prayer was kindled, gratitude was inspired, and good intentions were confirmed to devote one’s heart to the Lord for the rest of one’s life!” 253. Such reflections are associated with the special veneration of the Blessed Virgin, which has developed in Rus' since ancient times, as pointed out, for example, by Saint Demetrius of Rostov: “If someone asked me: what is the strongest and strongest in the heavenly world? - I would answer: there is nothing stronger and stronger on earth and in heaven after our Lord Jesus Christ, like our Most Pure Lady Theotokos, Ever-Virgin Mary. She is strong on earth: for She erased the head of the invisible serpent and struck down the power of hell, By Her victories are erected, By Her enemies fall. She is also strong in heaven: for she binds the strong and mighty God with her prayers” 254. F.N. resorts to this holy invincible power of the Queen of Heaven. Glinka in his poem “There is no language in the Celestial Empire...” with a prayer for the salvation of the Fatherland during the hard years of war: The violence of this melancholy battle, Become victorious in an argument Shatters and hits ships!... Let the wicked have their feet And as then, as among the people, Our Anthem will thunder in the churches!... 255 The image of the Mother of God attracted F.N. Glinka not only for its mystery and miraculousness, as a bright and saving phenomenon of spiritual and church experience, but also from a religious and historical point of view. Throughout his life, the poet collected facts, both biblical-canonical and apocryphal, relating to the earthly life of the Blessed Virgin Mary. As a result of this truly ascetic, painstaking work, a grandiose religious poem “The Mysterious Drop” arose, in which the biblical basis and direct quotation from the Holy Scriptures are combined with traditions existing in folklore. In the plot center of his lyric-epic work, F.N. Glinka placed an apocryphal legend, widespread among Christians in different countries, about how the Most Holy Mary miraculously, with her breast milk, brought back to life a baby who was dying in the family of a robber who captured the Holy Family on the way to Egypt. In a special publication dedicated to this apocryphal story of biblical antiquity, L. Denisov pointed out: “The legend about the mysterious drop dates back to the time of the flight of the Holy Family to Egypt. In Slavic, it is presented in detail in the fourth chapter of Ioannikiy Golyatovsky’s book “New Heaven” (its first edition appeared in Lvov in 1665. Compare also “Kyiv Antiquity.” 1887. No. 11. P. 453). Its content is as follows. During the flight of the Blessed Virgin with the Eternal Child and St. Joseph to Egypt in a deserted place, robbers attacked them and took them captive. At this time, in the arms of the robber’s wife, the child was languishing in death throes. The robber’s wife looked at the Christ Child and the Blessed Virgin for a long time and finally said: - Wife! Quiet and beautiful is Your Baby; Your milk must be healthy. Give at least a drop of it to my sick child: maybe he will be healed and feel better. The Most Holy Virgin took the sick child in Her arms, and as soon as a drop of Her healing milk touched his lips, he came to life, and health returned to him. Amazed by this miraculous healing, the robbers no longer held the holy travelers and released them in peace. The famous spiritual poet Theodore Glinka dedicated an entire poem to this legend in two parts” 256. By the way, in the preface to the poem, the author showed that the range of sources for his work is much wider: “The content of “The Mysterious Drop” is taken from an ancient legend preserved in the chronicles of the Middle Ages, in family stories and in the memory of Christian peoples. Luther, mercilessly destroying many oral traditions among the people, spared the legend of the Mysterious Drop. He did even more: he rewrote, as they say, this folk legend with his own hand. Since then, among Protestants 257 it began to pass through the hands of devout commoners, just as the “Dream of the Mother of God” once walked through the hands of our people. In ancient collections - under the title Tsvetnikov - written in our country during the time of Tsar Mikhail Feodorovich, between the legends about Judas the traitor and others, there is a legend about the Drop. This legend, which passed from the East to the West - from Palestine to Europe, delighting listeners in the forest and mountain castles of knights, is repeated among our people, mainly in Little Russia, where (in those places where the good old times have still survived), on the eve of the Christmas holiday, old people tell the young the legend that we presented here in pictures and descriptions and of which parts, apparently separated, are united by the internal content of the legend itself. Faith in the milk of the Blessed Virgin is completely acceptable to our Church. In the cross, granted by Tsar Mikhail Feodorovich to boyar Izmailov, along with particles of the relics of various saints, the milk of the Blessed Virgin Mary was placed. The image of healing with the most pure milk is clearly depicted in the miraculous icon called the Mother of God the Healer, which has many refugees, in Moscow, in the Alekseevsky Monastery. The icon depicts a suffering child, whom the Blessed Virgin heals with the milk of her breasts. “On Mount Athos the Mother of God the Mammal is honored; here, as they say, the Mother of God the Healer” 258. Despite such convincing forewarning of historical authenticity and widespread iconographic confirmation of the tradition, the author of the poem, in a note to the very first scene of the flight of the Holy Family into Egypt, was forced to make a reservation that, although many of the descriptions given in his work “are drawn from the Gospel, they are by no means the essence of the Gospel itself.” And in a footnote he explained: “This reservation was made for those who believe that there should be nothing in common between the truths of the Gospel and poetry. To this the famous Eduard Quinet responds: “These people gave up their imagination to paganism, and their belief in Christ and thereby split the unity of their inner life. - Only Milton with the Lost Paradise and Klopstock with the Messiah managed to reintroduce Christianity into poetry. “III Atobrian finally brought down the pagan ideal and gave the whole man - with his mind, heart and imagination - to Christianity.” It is actually comforting for us to remember that our Church honors the memory of St. Gregory the Theologian, whom his contemporaries (pagans) called “the sweetest poet.” – Simeon of Polotsk and others wrote in poetry, and St. himself. Demetrius of Rostov composed dramas (see Russian Vivl<iofika) and respected the poets of classical antiquity" 259 . When translated into poetic language, a biblical or apocryphal tale moves into another space - into the artistic world of a religious poem, while, of course, transforming and acquiring new specific features, often more detailed in its details compared to the text of the Holy Scriptures or folk tradition. To justify the admissibility of a certain freedom of artistic creativity by F.N. Glinka wrote: “A poet, like a painter, borrows only the content, and leaves the setting and coloring to himself, as circumstances require. In his paintings, the author uses words instead of paints: “painters speak with a brush, poets paint with words.” The author of the legend should note that in his simple, simple plan and in his poetic presentation he did not have the freedom assigned to poets and novelists; that is why, perhaps, it will not satisfy everywhere the strict requirements of so-called artistry**. The author subordinated all his expressions to the conditions of the subject. He wrote under the conditions of: a) biblical tradition; b) historical order; c) the localities of the described region and customs; d) eras that had their own modern color (the author tried to ensure that, if possible, local color was reflected in everything), and most of all: under the condition of dogma and the strict view of the Orthodox Church***. In this sense, the author (as he should) did not allow himself to change the words of the Savior, but conveyed them in the very meaning as they (the words of the God-man) reached us in the four-trumpet voice of the Gospel. In a word, the author painted the picture**** according to already prepared frames and often (contrary to the demands of imagination and creativity) could not step one step beyond the boundaries indicated to him. Do not look for sensual beauty from the author, nor for anything that flatters the senses: his goal and concern are spiritual. He drew his thoughts from three sources: from nature (of course, graceful), from an unknown source - the human heart, and from the highest of all - the source of eternal, divine truths. Speaking in the language of architecture, the construction of the legend (The Mysterious Drop) takes up very little space on the ground, and with its entire building, like a pointed structure (of the Middle Ages), it tries to fly upward - into the airy spaces. Therefore, all parts of the legend, taken together, constitute one whole spiritual organism, permeated by one thought, one truth: diversity in unity was the author’s goal” 260. Such artistic principles of constructing the work, of course, could not help but be reflected in the image of the Blessed Virgin Mary, which stands in the spiritual and meaningful center of the poem. Solemnity and majesty are inherent in the very first lines that open the paintings of “The Flight into Egypt”: Eclipse, stars of Palestine! Be still, sweet sound of streams! Don't wake up, valleys, Evening song of the nightingales, No mountain doves cooing! O gift of Jehovah, Palestine! Carrying it with him to someone else’s distance?!.. You are the stars, the sun and the moon, Hurry everyone to the floods of the Nile, She is hurrying to his shores! (I, 3) 261 Such a sublime, inspired exclamation, filled with delight from the author of the poem, is followed by a calm description of the procession. But nevertheless, even this seemingly impartial view from the outside is full of love and spiritual jubilation: The travelers walked along the road to Egypt: The Elder was gray-haired, but cheerful and dignified; In one hand he held a tall staff, In another, clutching the reins, he led a donkey, And she sat on a donkey like a queen, Young Mother with her wonderful Baby, I have never seen it before or after Him! What peace shone in Her face! (I, 4) The reader’s imagination sees the bright and beautiful divinely inspired image of the Mother of God, as if copied by the poet from a wonderful icon familiar to him: The wife is dressed in scarlet clothes, Tailored as if from the dawn, And the blue cover - a piece of the sky - Wrapped around Her beautiful head (I, 5) The same picturesque image of the Most Holy Mary appears in the chapter “Desert”, but not so iconographic, as spiritual and at the same time endowed with real living features. But through the earthly features of the young Mother, not only the “royal grandeur of the brow” clearly shines through, but also the “paradise of Her soul.” This truly unearthly picture, created by a divinely inspired poet, turns out to be surrounded by a sacred space filled with a host of angels flying from the mysterious heavens: And the donkey, humble under the yoke, walked, And sat on his ridge Young Mother in her scarlet robe Under the blue blanket of air And with the royal majesty of the brow Oh! how beautiful and bright She is! The whole sky was cast in Her soul, And the stars of joy and grief sparkled In that heaven - in the paradise of Her soul! And the goodness of feelings and virgin thoughts, Through the light crystal of Her hair, We looked kindly at the whole world, How I looked at Her, flying from heaven, Chorus of angels, with hourly concern, Swarming over the beautiful traveler (I, 7) Descriptions reminiscent of the iconographic features of the Mother of God are replaced in the poem by sublime appeals to the angels to glorify Her in bright chants, and the majestic “Song on High” is included in the structure of the narrative. The author of the poem cries out: Tune your harps, children of light, In the halls of God's shrines, The fate of the universe is in your hands, She carries in foreign sands, - Brighter than sunlight The story will rush into the distant summer, How it carried, among the sands, Fates and future of centuries Praise, sing, children of light, In beautiful songs of heights, Holy Virgin of Nazareth! (I, 8–9) Creating an artistic image of the Virgin Mary, F.N. Glinka carefully coordinated every event from Her life described in the poem with sacred tradition. The mystery of the conception (“by the influx of the Divine Spirit”) of the Blessed Virgin and the birth of Jesus Christ was of a legendary nature in sacred antiquity. According to various historical sources that were available to the author of the poem, They entered the Sanhedrin and the ancient church And they entered the Roman praetorium Vague, mysterious rumors About a new, about a holy, about a wondrous thing... This is how people unconsciously guessed About what awaited them in the future; But the mystery of the years has long been accomplished, And everything took part in that secret: Gabriel was chosen from the angels, From humanity – the Holy Virgin; The star passed as the messenger of the sky, The earth was preparing one of the rivers - And all the worlds took part in the matter!.. (I, 88) These sacred events were also predicted by the ancient prophets, to whose testimony the author of “The Mysterious Drop” refers in the second volume of his work: Yes! I said, "There will come a time The heat of judgment and wrath will subside, And the Child (full of heaven) The Virgin will conceive in a pure womb, And they will call Him: Emmanuel!.. That name is a vessel of great powers, That name tells us: “God is with us!” (II, 250) 262 In the best moments of my delight I spoke about Her, about this heavenly door, That the best glory is inside the Tsar’s daughter: Then they didn’t understand this!... (II, 251) 263 F.N. When creating the image of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Glinka does not always use the rich visual possibilities of his poetic language. Sometimes he proceeds to a characterization that is simple and laconic in its means of expression and is built on lexical and syntactic repetitions, on enumerations that are capacious in their content and meaning: Mysteriously conceived from God, Mysteriously conceived Him, Receiving fire without being scorched, She is the wine of universal salvation; She is the one who contains the second heaven And she brought God to earth; In earthly lines, the purest scroll of God, In which God wrote the whole sky with a word, Nourished with her purest milk The One who feeds the world with His spirit (II, 15) Such thoughtful generalizations, made on the basis of biblical sources and as a result of the study of theological literature, are complemented by a description of the specific situation and are poetically colored “as required by the circumstances” inherent in the nature of the genre of religious poem of wide epic scope. Although the creator of “The Mysterious Drop” made a reservation in the notes to his work that in the process of composing “he did not have the freedom assigned to poets and novelists,” he still sometimes went far beyond the facts, events and characteristics known from the canonical biblical texts. Such, for example, is the chapter “Farewell Word” in the second volume of the poem, which describes in detail the premonitions and experiences of the Most Holy Mother of God, Her conversations with Her Son Jesus Christ in the time immediately preceding His Calvary crucifixion. From the poet’s pen comes a scene that is largely realistic in style and dramatic in content, in which a sublime, tragic monologue of the Mother of God sounds: Alone, having chosen a quiet hour at midnight, And for a long time, with affection, looking at the Son, She said to him without drying her eyes: “What fate awaits you, child?! My only, Divine Son! The subject of my thoughts and worries! Where are you going? Where do you want to go?... Why don’t you postpone the dangerous walk? – And so you’re already walking on needles, Through thorns, on this sad land, Where it smells of death and sin, they have Insensitive - for the truth, deaf!!... And so is the aroma of Your shrine Everything perishes here, like a lily in the desert. O martyr for sinners! (II, 17) Human pain is interspersed with divine prophetic omens and sacred sacraments. In a lengthy exhortation, consisting of many convincing arguments and entreaties of the Mother of God, begging Her Son not to go to Jerusalem, where betrayal and lies await Him, where He will be delivered into the hands of murderers, one can hear the sadness and suffering of an earthly mother: My soul aches with foreboding, It hurts! - Oh, don’t go!... All the villains are there: There Herod, the formidable tetrarch of Caesar, - This fierce wolf and together the crafty fox, A violent hail entangled in deceit; – There is a Pharisee, a hypocritical novice; There's a questioner there, a fanatical scribe, There is a Roman hammer knocking on the heads, Mixing the blood of people with the victim, - Pilate!! Oh, do not entrust yourself to an unfaithful fate! All your traces are read there And every word is written down: There's something scary waiting for you!! No! These destroyers will not understand Your soul is divinely beautiful! Will they understand the Golden Verb there? Their copper, rusty souls?! Oh, the sun of my days! Oh, my sweet light!... Who will you leave for, without yourself, Am I a stranger to everyone and am I wiping out the tenant? Oh! I protected You from the swaddling clothes, Like the bright apple of my eyes! And You?... oh, son! you go straight to them... Oh!., don’t go to Jerusalem!! (II, 19–20) A sad refrain sounds like the plea “Oh!.., don’t go to Jerusalem!!” throughout Our Lady's prophetic warning of the dangers that await Her beloved Son. This sorrow is immeasurable: - So the Mother, grieving, exhorted the Son, (The One who has done so many miracles!) With prayer, with a rain of boiling tears; And, grieving with inconsolable melancholy, On the two palms and feet of saints, (On four cross piercings) Prophetically four kisses I left my heart melting in them... The Only Begotten Son responded to the inconsolable sobs of the Mother of God with sweet consolations: He listened and raised his finger He pointed out to her - That was a silent answer... But, turning to the one who sobbed with bitter tears, A sweet whisper poured hope into Her soul: “Do not be surprised, do not hinder their malice, Don't cry, O Mother!.... See me in the grave! Even though the shadow of death embraces you, I will rise again on the third day! And, having snatched the prey from death, I will exalt You, I will magnify You!” (II, 21) Holy Scripture is laconic in its description of the Mother of God during the completion of the earthly life of Jesus Christ. It is only indicated that she was a direct witness to His crucifixion, and the words of the Son addressed to Her are cited. In the Gospel of John we read: “Standing at the cross of Jesus were His Mother, and His Mother’s sister Mary of Cleopas, and Mary Magdalene. / Jesus, seeing the Mother and the disciple standing there, whom he loved, said to His Mother: Woman! Behold, Your son. / Then he says to the disciple: Behold your Mother! And from that time this disciple took Her to himself” (John 19:25–27). In the second volume of “The Mysterious Drop” in the chapter “Three Crosses” not only the feelings and experiences of the Mother of God during the crucifixion of Her Son are shown, but also a detailed description is given, a detailed realistic picture of the sacred tragic event: But at the cross, at the middle cross, One wonderful wife stood She understood Him and understood... And the blood of the Sufferer dripped onto Her!!! And they fell, drop after terrible drop, Then the stone rain fell on Her chest, Then on the head... And a fiery stream They flocked to the heart they knew, Where once lay the germ of God... How to describe all the sorrow in the tearless eyes? How can I describe all the sorrow in Her face?! Showered with a thick wave of hair And squeezing her hands... She was all sadness: From all sides swords pierced into the womb Alive for torment, for life half dead!... But not a single one uttered a groan From blue lips - half-opened... High tracking destination, Peaceful under the crown of thorns, Numb, all the marble is cold, She lived on another hope Unclear, but sweet soul... (II, 71–72) In the poem “Virgin Mary”, which dates back to the late period of F.N. Glinka, a more generalized and capacious image of the Mother of God is given. Here the poet, as it were, sums up his experience accumulated over many decades in creating the image of the Blessed Virgin and at the same time develops it. If in “The Mysterious Drop” the description of the life of the Virgin Mary ended with the event of the crucifixion of Jesus Christ, then in this later work the narrative of the poem continues and shows the last segment of the earthly life of the Virgin Mary - after Golgotha: Like a star above the blue sea, All high hopes are the goal, - So, in my earthly captivity, The Son raised her to heaven! 264 The poem “Virgin Mary” ends with the poet’s prayerful appeal to the Mother of God, in which the pure Orthodox faith in the all-mercifulness and boundless love of the Mother of God for every sinful person, in Her saving and protective power as the Holy Intercessor of the Russian Land sounds. In the opinion of F.N. Glinka, the image of the Mother of God, especially dear and close to Russian people, acquired extremely important significance at a time of widespread unbelief and revolutionary fires that engulfed Europe in the middle and second half of the 19th century. Above the unfolding “universal thunderstorm” the image of the Virgin Mary shone savingly for the poet. Now with a prayer, now with a tear, There are worries, there are misfortunes, Intercede with a peaceful word, So that in court, for sin, severe Your love has taken over!.. 265 * This is how the Most Holy One is depicted on one of the icons. (Note made by the poet in the autograph: RGALI. F. 141. Op. 1. Item 43. JI. 5 vol.) In the autograph, after the title of the poem, in brackets there was a subtitle “written from an icon,” which was subsequently crossed out. This author’s note testifies to another important source of inspiration—icons—that influenced the creation of the poetic image of the Mother of God in the poetic works of F.N. Glinka. ** If the author had the right to ask his readers for anything, he would ask them not to look for verses or poetry in his legend, but to look for one truth, which was his goal. – Note. F.N. Glinka. *** In this case, the author was guided by the instructions of highly enlightened clergy and even those who, by rank or inner calling, evading the bustling roads of the noisy world, are looking for ways of a solitary, inner life. – Note. F.N. Glinka. **** There is church painting (icons, iconostasis) for churches; There is another secular one - just paintings, portraits, prints. Candles glow in front of the icons; prints, paintings and portraits are looked upon as elegant. They pray to Christ in the icon; People are surprised at Christ in a painting, if it is elegant. Our legend does not contain icons; it contains only portraits and paintings, and it should be judged as a purely literary work, based on folk tradition. – Such legends, enjoying the full patronage of the Church, had great circulation in the Middle Ages and were preserved in the so-called golden books. – Note. F.N. Glinka. Zastrozhnova E.M. The problem of poverty and wealth in the light of the Christian tradition (Russian magazine criticism of the 1840s) The main reason that caused the increased attention of Russian criticism to the problem of poverty in the 40s of the 19th century was the spread of social-utopian teachings in Russia. One of them is the “new Christianity” of A.K. Saint-Simon 266 , whose main principle was to improve the lot of the poor population, “cleansed of all modern heresies” 267 religion. In accordance with his theory of association, built on the basis of reasonable mutual assistance of rich and poor, a new society should be formed, the reality of which will be an earthly paradise 268. The mid-1840s was the height of literary (magazine) polemics on issues of poverty and misery. At this time, there is debate about the benefits of private and public charity. A small but striking part of the controversy over the ethics of alms is reflected, for example, on the pages of Moskovskie Vedomosti. In No. 20 of the newspaper dated February 13, 1847, a letter was published, sent by city mail, under the heading “Public Charity of Our Day.” The anonymous author notes that numerous balls and masquerades, as well as concerts held for the benefit of the poor, lead to such a phenomenon as “cheerful charity.” Previously, in the old days, you had to recognize your brother as a beggar and, giving to him, be touched by your soul. It was rude and uneducated, peasant charity. Now charity has become “civilized.” It should be noted that the tone of the letter is ironic, and the irony itself is directed precisely against such “cheerful charity,” as evidenced by the final statement of the author of the message: “Oh, how happy you are, the poor of our days!” 269. In the next issue of Moskovskie Vedomosti, an article by a certain L appeared. He, clearly not feeling the irony of his opponent, proposes to seriously reflect on the pros and cons of both private and public charity. The conclusions contain a fairly reasonable proposal to combine public and private charity, placing the second as the basis of the first. However, L. concludes his article with the thought of the consolation that should come to all people, subject to the achievement of a still distant ideal - a society where charity will be barely known, “because it is not needed, and where alms will be considered humiliating not only for the one who accepts, but also for the one who gives” 270. It was this dream of a society in which it would be humiliating to both ask for help and help the poor, which gave rise to S.P.’s response to it. Shevyreva. In the drama “about three persons and four acts, with an epilogue,” the idea of ​​a future society, proposed by L., is brought to the point of absurdity 271. The leading critic of "Moskvityanin", thus, disputes the Saint-Simonist thesis about the structure of society on the basis of reasonable mutual assistance. A state in which relations between rich and poor people are built on the principle of rational egoism ultimately ceases to need both love and reason itself. And Shevyrev reflected this idea in his “drama,” which is interesting because it gives a vivid idea of ​​the debate on issues of poverty and misery, vividly depicts not only the mood of society in the 1840s, but also clarifies the “context” of the works of writers of the “natural school” about “little people.” Poverty, as the main subject of controversy during this period, was perceived by most enlightened people as the most important social evil that must be destroyed. Entire ideological and even political-economic systems were built around this problem; the words “poverty” and “poor” were on everyone’s lips. Books appear devoted to economic problems, for example, Alexander Butovsky’s brochure “An Experience on National Wealth and the Principles of Political Economy.” An interesting review is by V. Milyutin, who gave the book a general negative assessment 272. But certainly pursuing purely “educational” goals, the critic dwells in detail on the economic teachings of S. Sismondi, quoting his works quite fully: “A country in which the mass of the population is subjected to constant hardships, painful worries about their existence and everything that suppresses the soul, destroys morality and degrades character, is a barbaric and unhappy country, even if even in its highest classes there were people who have reached the degree of human bliss, people who would develop all their abilities, would ensure all their rights, would be able to provide themselves with all the pleasures” (from Sismondi’s book “New Beginnings”, 1820) 273. Milyutin then talks about the “philanthropic direction” of economics, which went beyond the teachings of Sismondi. Its representatives, analyzing the laws of social development, sought to come up with a device that would destroy “all human suffering, provide everyone with the greatest possible share of wealth, pleasure and happiness” (emphasis mine. - E.Z.). The reviewer therefore really did not like how Butovsky placed emphasis when analyzing the theories of Nikker and Ling, Gerrenschwand, Owen, and Fourier, calling their attempts to derive a new formula for a reasonable economic structure purely utopian. As an excellent economist, Milyutin, of course, realized the truth of these words, but in his article he warned readers against a contemptuous attitude towards modern utopias, trying to prove that utopia is “an ideal that is strived for,” and science helps its gradual implementation in life. “Idea and utopia are predictions of the future. Utopia constantly turns into science” 274. Thus, the ideas of utopian socialism and “new Christianity” were recognized as completely scientific, and the abolition of human suffering caused by the lack of “wealth, happiness, pleasure” was considered legal and highly humane. Connected with this understanding of poverty and “humiliation” of a person is the view of the staff of Nekrasov’s Sovremennik on the mandatory satisfaction of the needs of all people, including officials, taking into account the fact that the degree of need to enjoy certain pleasures of life is different for everyone: “Some people have many needs, others have fewer. Two people live together, enjoy the same rights in society, have the same sources of livelihood, have the same occupation, and yet one of them suffers, the other is completely content. Isn’t it clear that the first is much poorer than the second” 275. The increased needs of man, clearly, were caused by that “spirit of the time”, those “needs of the century”, about which “enlightened” intellectuals spoke from the pages of “advanced” magazines. People who were accustomed to perceive their poverty with humility, as a sign of the will of God, were forced to impose a “new religion” that defended equality in the distribution of material goods and pleasures. In P. Morozov’s article “Christianity and Idolatry,” such things are given their names: “Some of the new persecutors of Christianity attribute great praise to it, but claim that it no longer corresponds to the highest needs of the age. What are these needs? Isn’t it the need for money and sensual pleasures?” 276. In Morozov’s article, idolatry is a way of thinking that is contrary to Christianity: “the human spirit, having lost the desire for God, is attracted by external objects and pours out on them the treasures of love, which have turned into passions” 277. Unfortunately, the followers of “idolatry” (“new Christianity”), who advocated the eradication of poverty as a social phenomenon with the help of science, did not always notice the manifestation of the other side of this desire - the cultivation of a passion for wealth, the desire to achieve human happiness through money. This “passion” could be revealed, for example, in the form of a humorous review of Rothschild’s book “The Art of Making Money in a Simple, Pleasant and Accessible Way to Everyone” 278 . The author of the review invites readers to quickly buy and read valuable “instructions”, and also sincerely wishes to make them more money 279 . Along with an easy and quick way to make money, happiness must definitely come to a poor person’s home, which since the 1840s began to be considered from a “scientific” position. It would seem that Rothschild’s book, which was not worthy of special attention (called “paper-spinning literature” by the reviewer of the “Bibliographic Department” of Moskvitian), 280 also evoked a response from the Moscow magazine. The critic’s tone is not so much good-natured and humorous as that of the Sovremennik reviewer, but rather caustic and ironic: “The end of the world! The philosopher's stone has been found, humanity has reached an extreme degree of progress! From now on, it ceases to fuss, fuss, work, earn a living, and sometimes even cheat, which it did until now because of despicable metal. from now on, it will calmly enjoy all kinds of pleasures, all the blessings of this world. Who will water and feed humanity, serve it, sew boots, harness horses? Everyone is his own master, everyone has a dime a dozen of money...” 281. The review contains an open polemic between Moskvityanin and Sovremennik and Otechestvennye Zapiski on “topical issues of the century.” The “advanced” magazine literature of the 1840s took poor officials, “little people” under its protection. She led her contemporary readers to the conclusion that in the current conditions, when rank “pressures” a person, forces him to live according to the strict “regulations” of the “environment”, and promises him nothing but poverty and misfortune, only two options are possible for a petty official: either to become a scoundrel, that is, to start taking bribes or to go “to something that is not entirely clean” 282, or, having outwardly resigned himself to such a life, despair, lose heart. The result of “environmental pressure” can also be mental insanity. In addition, statistics have stated that representatives of class I (nobles, civil and military officials) are more likely than people of other classes (class II: merchants, tradesmen, artisans, class III: soldiers, serfs) to experience insanity. Moreover, it is interesting that in class I of the mentally ill, the number of mentally ill men is more than twice as large as the number of mentally ill women, and, conversely, in classes II and III, the number of mentally ill men is two times less than the number of mentally ill women. This proportionality, according to the author of the article, is explained by the fact that men of the educated class are much more susceptible to “harmful influences that produce insanity” 283. Therefore, “enlightened” people of the era began to take care of poor officials, for whom the “truly human spirit of the times” was dictated by the desire, on the one hand, to identify the cause of people’s poverty, and on the other, to scientifically approach the issue of its complete eradication. In the review “Russian Literature in 1847” A.D. Galakhov names the main features inherent in that time: “A characteristic phenomenon of modern life is the strong desire of society for material interests. Everywhere contentment is the main issue, the glaring concern of our century, writes an informed critic, without material well-being there can be no free development of the individual” (hereinafter, italics are mine. - E.Z.) 284. The second feature is called sociality. It offers mainstream science the main task: to show the laws of uniform distribution of goods among all classes, to determine reasonable principles, constant rules of social wealth. “With a change in the view of the real happiness of man and society, the concepts of the pleasures of life and consolations in misfortune have changed. Earthly joys are among the reasonable demands of our nature. Pleasure has lost its former, disgraced meaning; it has become a normal human need, so that now there is no great need to divide objects into useful and pleasant. To inspire desires, to strive not for deprivation, but to satisfy needs, to seek pleasures and pleasures, and not to avoid them, to eliminate shortcomings and acquire everything you need, to be cheerful in contentment and not to sing the idyllic praises of poverty - this is what human nature requires and what the efforts of society must fulfill. Science must become at one with life and with friendly assistance lead us to the desired goal. As for the misfortunes that are sent to a person either by himself or by the cruel necessity of fate, the character of modernity is revealed here in the evasion of fictitious reliefs and in the search for real joys” 285. Thus, enlightenment and “mainstream science” were committed to making people happy. According to the author of the article, this should have happened not only through “uniform distribution of benefits across all classes.” It is also necessary to provide people with an equal share of pleasures and pleasures. This is how “scientists”, Russian heirs of the French “enlightenment”, saw human happiness, apparently forgetting that it also has a higher, spiritual meaning and, translated from church language, means bliss. This is something more than ordinary earthly happiness. The New Testament gives people nine beatitudes, and the first of them is: “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 5:3). Blessed - that is, extremely happy and pleasing to God; the poor in spirit are humble, aware of their imperfection. The Beatitudes are given to Christians in order to show those necessary spiritual qualities that they must possess in order to approach God and gain holiness: “Holiness, born of closeness to God, is the highest beatitude, the highest happiness that a person can desire” 286. But the “enlightened” people of the 1840s thought little about the spiritual side of the problem of poverty. The first place was given to the desire of society only for “material interests”, without which, it was believed, there is no “free development of the individual.” Thus, the person was deprived of the freedom of choice 287 given to him by God, and was forcibly led to “perfection” 288. Moscow Metropolitan Philaret could not remain indifferent to this understanding of human happiness by his contemporaries. He comments on society’s desire for godless, “human-like” perfection in the following way: “Humanity is moving towards perfection! This is not entirely untrue. Our philosophy took this thought from religion and envied its sublimity; stole it, but did not understand it and did not know how to use it. Religion has discovered that God leads humanity to perfection and bliss, cutting off incorrigible evil with justice, correcting evil with mercy, giving His strength to weakness, but never suppressing freedom by force, but inclining it to goodness through love; proud philosophy, having listened badly, vainly retells that humanity moves towards perfection by itself, conquering (as it adds) nature through art, discoveries, acquisitions, but (which it does not always preach, but shows by deeds) without trying to get closer to the Creator of nature” 289. And further: “they promise a golden age: and where they most think that all this is happening and will happen by itself, and least of all care about blessing and enlightenment from above, there precisely, and at the same time, they find neither virtues, nor morals, nor peace, nor security, vices are not curbed, feuds are endless, alliances are unreliable, wisdom has become nothing more than an industry, and knowledge is a commodity, books and shows. filled with crimes and horrors, like dungeons and places of execution - is this really a direct road to the perfection of mankind? MM. Dunaev talks about the identification by culturologists of two types of cultures - soteriological (from Latin - savior) and eudaimonic (from Greek - happiness). The transition from the first to the second in European history was the Renaissance, which began to pay main attention to “earthly treasures.” In Rus' this happened much later. In Russian society of the 1840s, the desire for “earthly treasures” and the oblivion of “heavenly treasures” became predominant. This time is one of the turning points in the history of our culture, the next stage of apostasy. However, “enlightened” magazine literature, which largely provoked the revolutionary sentiments of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, was not a complete ruler of minds, as literary criticism of the 20th century imagined us to be. Along with false enlightenment, the desire for “earthly treasures”, in Russian society there has always existed (and will exist) true Enlightenment, the Light of Christ, “heavenly treasures” - the spiritual wealth of Orthodox Rus'. That is why such a difficult period of Russian culture as the 1840s, and the journal polemics of these years, require detailed research. Evstigneeva Yu.A. A spiritual look at the title image in the play by A.N. Ostrovsky "Dowry" Following the Purpose of Our Lord's Redeemer Jesus Christ, we must pass on our lives according to His Divine teaching, so that through this we may receive salvation for our souls. Venerable Seraphim of Sarov Russian literature adopts the Orthodox point of view on life (though not always in full) as the main idea, thus becoming Orthodox in its spirit. Classical literature teaches a religious view of man, establishes a spiritual view of the inner world of heroes, and defines the most important criteria for assessing their existence. Orthodoxy is the basis of the Russian worldview and national existence. It is this that determines a person’s close attention to his spiritual essence and forms the basis of his inner self-deepening, which is certainly reflected in the best works of art. That is why Russian literature has always seen its task and meaning of existence in kindling and maintaining spiritual fire in human hearts. The dramaturgy of the 19th century is no exception. Alexander Nikolaevich Ostrovsky introduced the reader and theater viewer to the life of a merchant with all its problems, paying special attention to female images. Thus, in the play “The Dowry,” the playwright once again puts the fate of a woman at the center of events, showing life from the most emotional and expressive side, contrasting sincerity and gullibility with cold and soulless calculation and selfishness. The author reflected the conflict in the soul of the main character between conscience and the desire for material gain. He showed her in a world immersed in the chaos of dark lusts, vain intrigues, and soul-corroding passions. Larisa is a girl who was unable to spiritually resist merchant society and succumbed to the temptation of adultery. The heroine is attractive. It is clear that she cannot avoid simple earthly temptations: expensive gifts, compliments from others. Throughout the entire play, Larisa is next to her mother, consulting with her on what to do. Researchers usually do not point out the important role of Kharita Ignatievna, who is selfish and does not strive for high life values. She invites merchants to visit and unobtrusively asks for expensive gifts for her daughter. Thanks to her, a vicious circle forms around Larisa, from which the homeless woman cannot get out. The girl has an unenviable position: her mother gathers all sorts of rabble in the house, and her daughter needs everyone to smile. If Katerina in the play “The Thunderstorm” seeks peace of mind by turning to God, then Larisa, realizing the hopelessness of her situation, does not turn to prayer, they did not teach her to believe in a higher power. Perhaps that is why the soul of the homeless woman is constantly in turmoil. Soviet-era critics believed that the theme of purchase and sale permeates Ostrovsky’s entire work, is the main one and is stated at the very beginning of the drama, when there is a conversation about “Swallow”, profitably bought by Vozhevatov from Paratov, about pleasures for which “you have to pay” (meaning the pleasure of visiting the Ogudalovs’ house). Merchants talk about how nice it would be to take Larisa Dmitrievna to Paris for an exhibition, that this woman is created for luxury and she, like a real diamond, needs an expensive frame. The Monk Seraphim of Sarov in his instructions said that we must try to be free from unclean thoughts, that we must repel even the first attack of sinful thoughts and movements and dispel them from the earth of our hearts. The Holy Father compared these evil thoughts to the children of Babylon and believed that they, while they were still babies, should be smashed against the stone, which is Christ. It is especially necessary to crush such passions as gluttony, love of money and vanity, with which the devil managed to tempt even our Lord Jesus Christ Himself at the end of His exploits in the desert 290. The devil, hiding, laid out nets for Larisa, but she could not break them against the “stone,” and when she realized the whole essence of what was happening (Paratov’s deception), it was too late, so she ended her life tragically. The heroine of "Dowry" does not have the same integrity and inner strength that was felt in Katerina Kabanova ("The Thunderstorm"). Her soul is torn before a choice: to live according to the laws of honor, according to moral standards, or to make a moral compromise. Researchers believe that the weakness of the character of the heroine reflects the features of the time, practical and cruel. However, it seems that this is not entirely true. The main thing is the spiritual and moral education of the heroine. Larisa's soul is empty, which is why the girl is interested in Paratov. The devil uses external beauty against God. How, if not attractiveness, is it easier for him to seduce our souls? To salvation or to destruction is an unnecessary question. Every mentally sensitive person is well aware of the deceitfulness of such beauty. This is a dead mask behind which moral baseness, deceit and cruelty are hidden. Larisa is worried: from Paratov she is looking for pure love, from Karandyshev - a quiet family life, from Vozhevatov - peace and support, and finally, from Knurov - a place as a servant. It's all in vain. The playwright emphasizes the spiritual loneliness of the heroine of “The Dowry” with an unexpected device: she dies to the accompaniment of a “loud choir of gypsies.” Can an Orthodox person die like this? The gypsy choir reflects Larisa's lifestyle. Just as gypsies live a nomadic life, so her soul “wanders.” The heroine perceives Karandyshev’s shot as a blessing, as relief from suffering. However, has Larisa really gotten rid of mental anguish? Dying, the heroine understands that she is a stranger to everyone, but at the same time she does not blame anyone, because she is to blame for everything: “Let those who are having fun have fun... I don’t want to disturb anyone! Live, live everything! You need to live, but I need... to die... I don’t complain about anyone, I don’t take offense at anyone, you are all good people... I love you all... I love you all” 291. The final words of the heroine have a strong emotional impact on the reader and viewer: her death is not an accident, but an inevitable death due to an immoral lifestyle and the loss of the spiritual world. In the spirit of romance, Larisa perceives Paratov and her relationship with him, forgetting that the devil can transform into an angel of light and present the most plausible thoughts, but the heart will still feel some kind of vagueness, excitement in thoughts and confusion of feelings. But how the dreamy heroine perceives the situation is one thing, real reality is another. The fact that the girl is divorced from reality and for her there is only a world of love and suffering of unrequited passion determined her behavior. The rich businessmen surrounding Larisa understand the true meaning of the situation and foresee the tragedy in advance. However, she herself does not understand the role she plays in the lives of merchants. Her mother did not teach her to set moral goals for herself and achieve them in life; she directed her to a different path. A.L. Stein believed that Larisa’s decision to marry Karandyshev was caused not by poverty, not by need, but by pride and female pride: she would become the wife of a poor official and end the position of a deceived bride. Her marriage is a challenge to everyone who hung around her, especially Paratov 292. In fact, this is a hopeless situation. With her marriage, the heroine tries to cleanse her soul, but to no avail. Larisa is incapable of leading a spiritual and moral life, since she cannot repent of her sin, and commits it again. Leaving her groom on the shore, she goes for a ride along the Volga in the company of admirers. In the story of the heroine, Ostrovsky peculiarly parodied the plot of the romance by E.A. Boratynsky “Do not tempt me unnecessarily...” The dreamy and contemplative perception of the world for the homeless woman collapses. But she is not able to change the ideal of life that was inspired by romantic poetry. Everyone needs to try to maintain peace of mind and not be indignant at insults from others, for which it is necessary to restrain anger in every possible way. Through attention, the mind and heart should be protected from obscene thoughts. This can bring silence to the human heart 293 . Of course, Larisa also had to strive to comprehend spiritual love. Why does the heroine die at the end of the play? The girl was unable to take the moral path and find peace in life. If a person stops believing in God, then he perishes spiritually. The holy ascetic pointed out the path of spiritual development for everyone: from the beginnings of faith through the fear of punishment to the freedom of love in God - with the fear of falling away from God. Every everyday situation is a reflection of some moment of this internal movement occurring in every person. The spiritual laws that operated in Larisa’s life are essentially of a completely different nature than moral laws. In Soviet times, literary scholars, as a rule, were of the opinion that morality depends on social conditions, but spiritual life without the faith of Christ is impossible, as evidenced by the story of Larisa Ogudalova. The heroine surrounded herself with fans, and the main danger to the soul is passion, as the holy fathers repeatedly warned about. Archimandrite Cyprian (Kern) wrote: “Patristic asceticism, in its centuries-long experience, developed the doctrine of passions as the source of sin. The ascetic fathers were always interested in the original source of this or that sin, and not in the evil deed itself that had already been carried out. This latter is only a product of a sinful habit or passion deeply rooted in us, which these writers sometimes call “an evil thought” or “an evil spirit” 294. External circumstances hinder the desire of the homeless woman for true love - for God. The heroine of the play by A.N. Ostrovsky is undoubtedly internally strong. Larisa does not give in to sin without a difficult internal struggle. But why does she fail in it? Because her actions are inconsistent and crafty. The sin of adultery in this situation turns into spiritual torment. This is slavery - regardless of social circumstances. Moral strength alone is not enough to overcome spiritual shackles; a person needs faith in God. With Larisa, as with every person, there were two angels: one good, the other evil. The good angel is quiet, meek and silent. When he enters a person’s heart, he speaks to him about truth, purity, honesty, tranquility, and about every good deed. But the evil spirit is sharp-hearted, cruel and insane, and it wins in Larisa’s soul. The heroine finds herself alone, spiritually at that, which can only be overcome by faith in God, but this deep religious feeling in her is destroyed by sin and despair. A high and strong soul will not break under misfortunes, no matter what they may be. The life of a homeless woman is full of temptations and tortures that she could not get around. The girl did not have the strength to resist sin because she was spiritually alone. The problem of faith here becomes paramount. Unbelief turns out to be emptiness leading to death. A spiritual look at the image of Larisa reveals that the heroine of the play by A.N. Ostrovsky was not guided by Orthodox morality in her life. The homeless woman limits her actions only to the narrow framework of earthly needs and begins to see the meaning of her existence in the most convenient adaptation to the conditions of the material world. She chased after various kinds of “treasures” of earthly goods, but in the end she found inner emptiness. Ivanova E.M. Religious and poetic world of A.A. Feta Fet's religious position was interpreted by his contemporaries and twentieth-century researchers in a diametrically opposed way. The fundamentally important problem - whether or not Fet was an atheist - has occupied and continues to occupy the attention of literary scholars and critics. G.P. Blok, B.Ya. Bukhshtab, L.M. Lotman, R. Gustafson, E. Etkind considered Fet to be more of an atheist than any other poet. D.D. Blagoy resolutely rejected religion as a determining factor in Fet’s life position: “from Fet’s point of view, there are three ways to obtain an answer to the basic questions of existence: religion, art, science. The first for Fet, who remained a convinced atheist all his life, was untenable” 295. Many researchers considered the poet’s youthful dispute with I. Vvedensky as proof of atheism. G.P. spoke about the famous bet in his book. Block 296: Fet allegedly signed a contract, calling himself Reinbach, with an old acquaintance from his student years, the “nihilist” I. Vvedensky. According to G.P. Blok, Fet argued that even twenty years later he “will deny the existence of God and the immortality of the human soul and that if he loses the bet, he will go to Paris on foot” 297. In 1982, literary critic A.E. Tarkhov convincingly demonstrated the inconsistency of this argument by making the following comments: “The fact is that researchers interpret this document too straightforwardly, finding in it the beginning of that “atheism” that the poet did not change until the end of his life. Meanwhile, it is impossible to put Vvedensky’s “nihilism” and Fet’s “unbelief” on the same level: if the participants in the “contract” had met twenty years later, then Fet would have had to go to Paris on foot, because one of the key images of his poetry (and what, if not poetry, could testify to Fet’s true faith) would have been a soul directly called immortal” 298 . V. A. Shenshina notes that Tarkhov’s opinion became an important stage in the development of fetoscience. However, there was never a clear solution to the question of Fet’s faith and unbelief. In 1984, a discussion arose on this issue in the “Bulletin of the Russian Christian Movement”. N. Struve 299 spoke out against the point of view affirming Fet’s atheism, which was firmly held for several decades in literary criticism and which E. Etkind adhered to. E. Etkind, relying on the letters of the poet himself and the testimony of his contemporaries, argued that Fet’s religiosity, reflected in the lyrics, is not true, but “metaphorical” 300. The researcher argues his position by the fact that, according to people who were personally familiar with Fet, both religion and rituals were alien to him. Thus, Sergei Lvovich Tolstoy wrote: “I was always perplexed on what the friendship of my father with Fet was based. In contrast to his father, Fet was calculating and non-religious, a skeptic and a pagan. He was not hostile to religion, it simply did not exist for him” 301. E. Etkind supports his arguments with letters from Fet and L.N. Tolstoy, catching in this friendly correspondence an expression of mutual rejection of the ritualism of the Russian Church. In a letter dated January 30, 1873, Tolstoy addresses Fet with the following words: “My brother and I, just like you, looked at religious rituals and, having come together, involuntarily expressed to each other almost disgust for ritualism” 302. The artists had a special attitude towards the Unction. In a letter dated April 28, 1876, Fet stated that he would not call the priest “to see how... he leaves” 303. Tolstoy responded with a harsher judgment: “I will do the same when I get there, if I have the strength to think. The priests who will be called at this moment by our wives will not help us with you... The God of Hosts with his son, the God of the priests is just as small and ugly, an impossible God and even much more impossible than the god of flies would be for the priests...” 304. Fet responded to his interlocutor’s words sympathetically, but tried to convey his position: “I have long wanted to tell you that the state, from its point of view of multiplying people who pay duties, executes eunuchs. But skopchestvo is the most logical conclusion from the literal teaching of Christ...” 305. And later: “The Gospel is a preaching of complete asceticism and the denial of life...” 306 1 (letter dated September 30, 1880). This understanding of the gospel truths led to the sad confession of the sixty-year-old poet: “This is not given to me.” It is obvious that in the fragments of correspondence cited by E. Etkind in the article “On the worldview of A.A. Feta”, the position of L.H. is clearly indicated. Tolstoy than Feta. All that can be said about the latter’s letters is that they reflect an attempt at a personal understanding of religious values ​​(which is not at all typical of atheists) with a number of subjective conclusions (not entirely correct, but this only indicates the incompleteness of the search). E. Etkind, referring to the spiritual closeness of the two artists, makes a general conclusion about their attitude to faith: “Faith in the kinship of the human spirit and the infinity of the Universe, in the beginning of light is the essence of the world, and the faith embodied in the heavenly bodies in the mutual openness of two infinities, facilitating the penetration of one into the other, the highest optimism in the face of death and confidence in the spiritual immortality of the world and man - this whole complex is also characteristic of Leo Tolstoy. Fet and Tolstoy did not need religion to create an optimistic worldview” 307. Thus, the researcher substantiated the assertion that the appeal to religion in Fet’s lyrics is a manifestation of the peculiarities of the artistic worldview, rather a creative position than a spiritual need. As part of the debate, N. Struve pointed out some inconsistencies in E. Etkind’s arguments, drawing attention to the author’s failure to distinguish between the article “On the worldview of A.A. Fet" of a number of concepts: "For Professor Etkind, an atheist, a materialist, an opponent of ritual are one thing..." 308. This has led to misinterpretation of the word "atheist". N. Struve restores the content of the concept: “An atheist is one who consistently and convincingly denies the existence of God” 309. It is impossible to talk about the consistent denial of God either in Fet’s work or in his life position, for “doubts do not exclude moments of clear faith, and faith does not exclude moments of burning doubts...” 310. The most coherent and convincing position seems to be the position of N. Struve, who initially expressed a point of view diametrically opposed to E. Etkind, which prompted the latter to engage in polemics. Having presented a step-by-step analysis of the poet’s life and work, N. Struve states: “Fet was not an atheist either in his youth (except perhaps in his very first student years), or in adulthood, or “in the declining years of difficult years.”311 Agreeing with the widespread opinion in literary criticism about the ambiguity of the position of the young Fet, the researcher notes that the religious theme was outlined in the poet’s early lyrics: “In Fet’s early poetry, glorifying almost exclusively love and nature, several poems on religious themes crept in: in particular, a ballad about the creation of the Kiev Pechersk Lavra church in the image of a vision that appeared to its builders in the air, and three poems in honor of the Mother of God (two sonnets and an arrangement of “Ave Maria”)” 312. The first sonnet (“Lady of Zion”) is consonant with the poem “I, Mother of God, now with prayer...” by M.Yu. Lermontov. The consonance of the lines of these works does not indicate either similarity or imitation (Lermontov wrote his poem five years earlier than Fet): their correlation is close to a dispute. Fet's sonnet also begins with a heartfelt prayer for his beloved: I pray for the one by whom my life is clear. Let her bloom, be happy - Whether with another chosen one, alone or with me 313. “But right there, as if contradicting Lermontov, the poet refuses to give up his beloved to another and binds himself to her with “mutual prayers”” 314: Oh no! Forgive the influence of illness! You know us: we are destined for each other Save through mutual prayers. (p. 230) Prayer for a loved one unites love and faith for the poet. According to N. Struve, the religious motives of twenty-three-year-old Fet may be connected with Elena V. mentioned in his memoirs, to whom “religiously reconciled poems, captivating with their genuine sincerity” 315 were addressed: Like a serene angel of heaven, “Like a serene angel of heaven...” (P. 76) The sonnet “Madonna” (1842) is close to the poem of the same name by A.S. Pushkin and turned to the Sistine Madonna. In the 19th century, Raphael's painting was considered the highest expression of religious beauty and was widely known in high society. Unlike Pushkin, Fet distinguishes between the concepts of earthly and divine beauty. N. Struve believes that the painting produces a purely religious effect on the poet: “God sends him spiritual gifts, and not like Pushkin - a beautiful bride who somewhat blasphemously takes the place of the Mother of God” 316. Since Sanzio is in front of me Depicted the bowing of the eyelids, And this face, and this holy gaze, Humble and light clothes, And this is the womb of the mother, and in it A baby with a clear, joyful brow, With a smile tilted towards Maria. Oh, how the soul subsides to the bottom! So much from the holy cloth You send, my God, with the most pure Madonna! (p. 230) Through the humble appearance of the Virgin Mary, humility and peace of mind were sent down to the lyrical hero. Fet returned to the image of the Sistine Madonna in a sonnet in 1864: This is you, Raphael, messenger of God, Your wonderful dream revealed to you and us: The Queen of Wives - the Queen of Heaven! To the Sistine Madonna (p. 282) The last verse of the sonnet is undoubtedly consonant with Pushkin’s conclusion in “Madonna”: The purest beauty - the purest example 317. N. Struve defines this relationship not only through the similarity of structure, but also through a significant discrepancy in content: “Pushkin, who reduced divine beauty to worldly charm, has a purely pleonastic structure; in Fet, pleonasm serves as an ascent from earth to heaven” 318. Raphael is called by Fet the messenger of God, that is, the artist is thought of by the poet as an exponent of the divine in the earthly, therefore, his task is to grasp the highest and embody it in his work. That is why the lyrical hero does not feel insolence; his state is inspired humility, sent by God, it inspires, makes his perception pure and childish (let us remember the “half-childish worldview” 319 of Fet himself, for which the poet was so reproached by M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin): Like angels, infants inspired, You will also see us, O maiden, not embarrassed: Here the anxiety fades away before you. Thus, the analysis of Fet’s early work, presented by N. Struve, allows us to largely clarify the position of the young poet and reveal the prerequisites for the development of religious motifs in his later lyrics. The researcher comes to the conclusion: “Fet joins the great, Christian, spiritual tradition of Russian literature, begun by A.S. Pushkin and H.B. Gogol, continued by F.I. Tyutchev and F.M. Dostoevsky, B.S. Solovyov..." 320. M. Makarov 321 on the pages of the “Bulletin of the Russian Christian Movement” tried to resolve the contradictions in the views of Struve and Etkind, again returning to the opinion that Fet is characterized by a divided attitude towards faith. According to the researcher, Fet represented two natures at once: the atheist Shenshin and the spiritualized poet Fet. M. Makarov’s point of view is disputed by V. A. Shenshina, considering Fet’s Orthodox faith to be undoubted. The researcher, agreeing that for Fet the problem of unbelief and faith was relevant, believes that the content and roots of the poet’s dualism had other grounds. In 1840, Fet confessed in a letter to Ya.P. Polonsky: “The unbelief and faith that live in me are not fruits grown on a university bench, but on the reins of life” 322. Two years later, in one of his poems, the poet conceptualizes the problem of unbelief and faith as a struggle between the heart and the mind: When the arrogant mind, exhausted by the struggle With eternal science, having forgotten himself, he sleeps quietly And the poor heart is one with itself, When nothing weighs on him from the outside, When, thoughtless, but with feelings omnipotent, It will experience its own shame, Will imbue the grave with fearlessness And he will silently pronounce his terrible sentence, - To suffer, to suffer for the whole century aimlessly, without compensation, Try to fill the emptiness and look, As with every new attempt the abyss becomes deeper, Again go crazy, strive and suffer, - Oh, how I want to bend my knees then, As the prodigal son is drawn back to the Father - I believe in everything again - and with a whisper of prayer A hot tear streams down my face. “When the arrogant mind, exhausted by the struggle...” (p. 378) In this poem, the mind is defeated by the heart and the poet is ready to bow his knees before God like the prodigal son. He foresees his shameful end when he realizes that he cannot rise from the abyss, where aimless suffering carries him, and finds consolation only with prayer on his lips, in deep repentance and humility. MM. Dunaev in his work “Orthodoxy and Russian Literature” notes: “Here, Pushkin’s image is partly used, one can say: behold, the mind does not seek the Divine, but the heart strives for Him. Fet also has a theme of unbelief here, but from Pushkin, what a movement forward!” 323. The motive of unbelief is embodied through the conflict of the rational and the irrational: the struggle of the hero’s mind with the aspirations of the “unreasonable” soul, which with its “feelings” comprehends a world inaccessible to the “scientific”. V.A. Shenshin debunks the opinion of Shenshin as an atheist, presenting evidence of his involvement in the Russian Orthodox Church, with which he was associated all his life: “Like all the Shenshins, Afanasy Afanasyevich was baptized, married and buried by the Russian Orthodox Church” 324. Fet wrote in his memoirs how he was baptized and married: “Father Yakov baptized me and was the constant confessor of my father and mother” 325. The poet was married in Paris on August 16, 1857. “I had,” Fet said, “to turn to a Russian priest, the kind Father Vasiliev, who explained that in the Russian embassy church (in Paris) there are no uniform crowns, but that he was on the appointed day, i.e. by August 16, he will order crowns for flower girls, who will arrange them from artificial flowers on a frame. All that remained was to order the rings and bonbonnieres and invite the best men. The bride's best men were her brothers, and I.S. Turgenev" 326. Fet's funeral was held on November 24, 1892 in the university church in Moscow, then the coffin was transported to the Shenshin family estate. Fet rests in a crypt under the church built by O.V. Galakhova, the poet’s niece, nee Shenshina. Thus, V. A. Shenshina comes to the conclusion that the dualism attributed to Fet by some literary scholars turns out to be artificial and fragile, since it is often based on statements based on biographical data that came through second-hand (for example, the testimony of S. L. Tolstoy in an article by E. Etkind). Fet's religiosity was true: in his life and work, he constantly returned to the most important questions of human existence - about death and eternal life. The poet often entered into a lively exchange of opinions with his friends Ya.P. Polonsky and L.N. Tolstoy, with whom he loved to conduct polemical conversations (in the spirit of Schopenhauer) between an atheist and a believer. The views expressed by Fet were often accepted by literary scholars as his own, without taking into account the conventions of role-playing conversation. Polemical conversation served as a kind of mask, allowing one to explore the boundaries of concepts in order to get closer to the truth. The spiritual closeness of Fet and Schopenhauer was often interpreted as another proof of the poet’s atheism. But, based on the words of Fet himself, this point of view can be refuted: in a letter to H.H. To Strakhov on February 3, 1870, he directly says: “Neither I nor Schopenhauer are atheists or atheists” 327. The late Fet was greatly influenced not only by Schopenhauer, B.C. Soloviev, N.H. Strakhov, K.P., but also clergy. Evidence of this is correspondence with Konstantin Nikolayevich Leontiev (1831–1891), secretly tonsured monk Clement, a philosopher and writer, who lived in 1887–1891 near the walls of Optina Pustyn in a two-story house that belonged to her. Father Clement was the spiritual child of Elder Ambrose. As a straightforward person who humbly accepts the life given by God, Leontyev did not understand the youthful impulses of the lyrical hero of “Evening Lights.” On February 17, 1889, he wrote from Optina Pustyn to the young poet A.A. Alexandrov: “I continue to be happy for Fet and have been re-reading his old (i.e. young) poems all over again with great pleasure, but I absolutely cannot admire his “Evening Lights” like others! "Love you!" (cough, cough!..) “You sat down, I stood” (cough, cough, cough!)... I don’t understand!.. I wanted to add a second letter to the first letter (to Fet) - about the difference between his morning and evening lights, with friendly advice about love to keep quiet, but, imagine, Fr. Ambrose, who learned from someone on the outside about my intention, sent me a prohibition from the monastery - he said: “Let him not punish the old man for his love. No need". I, of course, very willingly put the door of the fence on my lips” 328. Thus, thanks to the intercession of Father Ambrose, Leontyev abandoned the idea of ​​​​interfering in Fet’s work, but later, in November 1890, he turned to the poet with spiritual guidance: “With sadness and sympathy, I read that you, dear Afanasy Afanasyevich, are severely bored... It is here, in Optina, right now, these last years, that I don’t know what boredom is!.. I remember all your conversations well. Once, when leaving, I extended my hand to you “over the threshold,” you retreated and forced me to return, saying: “There is no man without superstitions...”. So, listen to my “superstition”... Getting up in the morning, every day for three, for example, months, be baptized in the image, say mentally: “Lord, give me faith in the Church and the afterlife,” and nothing more!.. Faith will come and old age’s boredom will pass... I cannot demand that you immediately begin to feel what I feel when I read or hear: “I believe in the One God the Father”... “I want” and that’s why I strive, and that’s why I’m ready to ask Someone!.. And this Someone said: “Ask and it will be given to you; push and it will be opened to you.” Do not submit to my weak arguments, but believe my personal experience, exactly the same, exactly 10 years ago on Mount Athos!.. God help you” 329. Father Clement considered Fet a suffering person, in need of true faith and reaching out to it. Obviously, Leontyev got this impression due to the poet’s secretive nature, but we can say that on some issues they showed unanimity. Neither Father Clement, nor K.P., nor Fet accepted L.N.’s anti-church sermon. Tolstoy. In a letter to K.P. dated August 28, 1889, Fet stated: “He [Tolstoy] himself knows that I not only do not share his philosophical theory, but seem to represent a living opposite” 330. Later, the poet admitted to K.P.: “I ardently share the desire for Orthodoxy, Autocracy, Nationality” 331. Rejecting the statement about Fet’s atheism, we agree that throughout his life the poet had a weak desire for churchliness, apparently due to a complex attitude towards ritual. V. Afanasyev believes: “He had no church affiliation (that is, he almost did not go to church, although he occasionally partook of the Holy Mysteries of Christ, since he was baptized in the church)” 332. The researcher’s opinion is not unfounded, although we add that by the end of his life the poet nevertheless became firmly established in his desire for the Church, i.e. his churching took place. On January 10, 1892, Fet wrote to K.P.: “I’m standing at the point of the Kievites of the 10th century and, seeing that all the members of our August House, starting with the Emperor, are going straight from the station to Iverskaya, I repeat: “The Prince and the boyars were baptized, therefore, we should too!” – because I am convinced that Russia can only be Russia or nothing” 333. In Fet's lyrics, faith in the Creator is present both hidden (in the subtext) and openly declared in some poems. In Russian poetry, there is a genre of adaptations, which present subjectively meaningful (rather felt) prayers, Gospel and Old Testament events. Fet also turned to the genre of transcriptions. In the poem “The Longer I Live” (between 1874 and 1886), Fet claims that there are no more illuminating words than the words of the Lord’s Prayer, which he conveys in the work: The longer I live, the more I experience, The more commandingly I constrain the hearts of ardor, It’s all the more clear to me that it hasn’t happened since ages Words that illuminate a person brighter: Our universal Father, who is in heaven! May we cherish Your name in our hearts. Thy kingdom come, may your will be done Yours, both in heaven and in the earthly vale, Send now our daily bread from our labors. Forgive us the debt: and we forgive the debtors, And do not lead us, the powerless, into temptation, And get rid of self-conceit from the evil one. (p. 467) In rhythm, tone and composition, this poem is reminiscent of A.C. Pushkin’s “Desert Fathers and Immaculate Wives...”, although these are adaptations of different prayers (in Fet - “Our Father”, in Pushkin - the Lenten prayer of St. Ephraim the Syrian). Fet was deeply imbued with the words of the prayer and especially emphasized their meaning with his own interpretation, defining in the last line “conceit” (essentially pride) as the most sinful quality. The last line “And deliver us from the evil self-conceit” directly correlates with the words of the prayer: “but deliver us from the evil one” (Matthew 6:13). The temptation for the poet lies in his own claims to exclusivity, in pride, which can only be humbled by faith in God and gratitude for His gift. The call to humility is also heard in the poem “Unexpected Rain,” written in Stepanovka: Humble yourself, restless poet, - Moisture of life descends from heaven, What you expect is not there, Only the undeserved is good. Only one can, who, mighty, And the picturesque clouds send in 334. For Fet, faith is a deeply intimate feeling that glows in the poet with the words of “quiet”, “inner” prayer. Perhaps that is why he is rethinking the genre of transcription, refusing to paraphrase prayers into poetry. In a letter to K.P. (April 20, 1888) Fet explains his views as follows: “It is impossible to doubt the Christian ardor of Vladimir Solovyov, who visited us last summer. Imbued, in turn, like you, with the deep moral and vital meaning of the Lord’s Prayer, I once translated it into verse and asked Solovyov’s opinion. To this he answered me that he does not sympathize with any poetic adaptations of prayers, including the famous arrangement by A.S. Pushkin - “The Desert Fathers...”. Having developed Solovyov’s thought to myself, I agreed with him once and for all... For those who are not affected by the originals, the more so the surrogates will not be affected. The more a certain prayer affects us, the more its words resemble a well-known ladder, in which we only need to change the steps so that it no longer ascends us with usual ease” 335. At the end of the 1840s, Saint Ignatius (Brianchaninov) came out with a sharp condemnation of the transcriptions of prayers by secular writers: “All these works were written from “opinion”, animated by “blood movement.” And about spiritual things from “knowledge” promoted by “spiritual action”, i.e. by the action of the Spirit. May these dead forsake the gospel of God! It's none of their business! They don’t know what a spiritual crime it is to distort it, to give it a material meaning! They would have obeyed God’s command “not to sing the song of the Lord on the rivers of Babylon...” 336. The rebuke of Saint Ignatius is directed against poets who are far from church canons in life. Their “knowledge” of the Gospel does not give the desired result, while their purely literary works are often significant in spiritual terms. Literary critics note that Fet has many poems that are not directly religious, but subtly spiritual, delightful for the Orthodox soul. Such is the “landscape” lyricism in Fet’s work, combined with love and philosophical motives. Here the poet’s word is concentrated and quiet, like a prayer. The artist worships the beauty of nature - the creature of God, and not the Creator, but this is the intention of the mind, not the heart: following the well-known task of the poet to serve the Almighty, glorifying what He has created, the writer seeks beauty in everything, which was sometimes mistaken for paganism or pantheism. Landscape sketches in Fet's lyrics are dedicated to Russia, mainly its middle part, the custodian of the Orthodox faith, blessed by the Lord God. In moments of inspiration sent from above, Fet becomes a painter, painting an icon of the Russian Land: How rich I am in crazy verses! This shine pleases me and I need it: All my diamonds are in the sky, All the dewdrops under them are pearls. Come out, beauty, don’t be shy! There are sounds, there are expensive colors: I will lavish affection in a moment. But when you pin the flower, Playfully or with a crafty thought, And, as if in a haze, your meek pupil Will light up with heart poison, The dawn blows a little on the cheeks, - Oh, how poor, how pitiful then, How helpless I am before you! “How rich I am in crazy verses!..” (P. 293) The poet does not spare any colors, but understands that his capabilities are meager: he is not able to compete with the Creator, to display the perfection of nature in its entirety. Fet often presents nature as a reflection of divine existence: The forests are humming, thunder is roaring And I look from below into the sparkle of lights, But enlightened and dumb, I’m not standing heavy at this moment, And at the hour when, as if in a dream, Your bright angel whispers to me “I’m shocked when all around...” (P. 93) In moments of creative insight, the POET approaches God, angels talk to him, he is inspired and believes with all his heart, soaring towards the sky. Fet praises God in his poems. The poem “Who Has the Crown” is a vivid example of praising the Almighty: Who will receive the crown: the goddess of beauty Or is it her image in the mirror? The poet is confused when you are surprised To his rich imagination: Not me, my friend, but God’s world is rich, In a speck of dust he cherishes life and multiplies, And that one of your glances expresses, The poet cannot retell this. (p. 275) Here the artist extols God's creation with poetic words. The author, who is praised for his talented poetry, humbly admits that we must thank the Lord for everything: for giving man the opportunity to feel the beauty of nature, and for endowing him with a poetic gift to glorify this world. The lyrical hero of the poem “The Lord is not powerful, incomprehensible...” feels his weakness and insignificance before God’s eternal and boundless gift: No, You are powerful and incomprehensible to me Because I myself, powerless and instantaneous, I carry it in my chest like a seraph, Fire is stronger and brighter than the entire universe. While I am the prey of vanity, The playground of her inconstancy, - In me he is eternal, omnipresent, like You, Knows neither time nor space. (p. 86) Elder Silouan of Athos said: “The soul lives long on earth and loves earthly beauty; she loves the sky and the sun, loves beautiful gardens, and the sea, and rivers, forests and meadows; The soul loves music, and all this earthly delights the soul. I think: how great our Lord is. What beauty He created for His glory, for the good of His people, so that the peoples would glorify their Creator with joy...” 337. Fet’s conscious, “head” desire to see and sing the beauty of the world for the glory of God is interspersed with unconscious, inspired babble (prayer), close to the “missing of God” described by Elder Silouan: “The spiritual [world], like an eagle flies in the heights, and feels God with its soul, and sees the whole world, although it prays in the darkness of the night” 338. Night. You can't hear the city noise, There is a star in the sky - and from it, Like a spark, a thought was born Secretly there is sadness in my heart. And this thought is bright and transparent, It’s like a sharp glance from sweet eyes; The depths of the soul are full of native light, And the long-time guest is happy with the experience. Everything is quiet, calm, as before; But the cover was removed by an invisible hand Dark sadness. Faith and hope Her chest opened, maybe love? What is it? Near loss? Or joy? - No, you can’t explain, - But it is so fiery, so holy, What kind of life do you thank the Creator for? "Night. You can’t hear the city noise...” (P. 389) Thanksgiving for life becomes the goal and content of creativity for Fet. Fet's poetry covers the life of Christ from Christmas to Easter, it reflects both the Resurrection of Christ and the belief in eternal life after death, it affirms the immortality of the soul. The poet's lyrics include a number of poems that are thematically related to the New Testament. One of them - “When the Divine One Fleeed Human Speeches...” (1874) - presents a picture of the temptation of Christ in the desert by Satan, taken from the Gospel of Matthew: When the Divine fled human speech And their idle pride And I forgot my hunger and thirst for many days, Him, hungry, on the crown of the gray rocks The Prince of Peace pronounced the majestic: “Here, at Your feet, are all the kingdoms,” he said! - With their charm and fame. Recognize only the obvious, fall at my feet, Hold back the spiritual impulse for a moment - And I will give all this beauty, all this power to You. And I will submit in the uneven struggle.” But He answered: “Listen to the Scripture: Before God the Lord, just kneel!” And Satan disappeared - and the angels came In the desert, wait for His commands. (p. 83) The critic B.V. Nikolsky, although he reproached the poet for reflecting in the work only the last of the three temptations of Satan, wrote: “It is difficult to embody all the greatness of the untempted spirit more gracefully and simply than was done by Fet” 339. For Fet, the victory of truth and beauty over dark and evil forces with the help of prayer addressed to God is important. N. Struve noted: “The temptation for Fet is to recognize one thing “obvious”, to reject the “spiritual”: this is a philosophical, metaphysical temptation, and not a moral-psychological one” 340. The researcher concludes that Fet's poems should be interpreted from this broad understanding of the temptations of Christ. In the ode “March 1, 1881,” the poet describes the last day of Christ. The date that served as the title of the poem is the day of the assassination of Tsar Alexander II, deeply respected by the poet. Redemptive Miracle Day; But the Heartbreaker is serene What will not forgive boundless love Before the silent victim of malice, The sun darkened, the coffins were opened, He is the cross and his crown of thorns The machinations of Pharisaism are powerless: What was blood became a church And the place of terrible crime - An eternal shrine to us 341. By the Resurrection, Christ conquers the malice of the world, which is not always able to appreciate “boundless love.” The place where Christ was crucified became a sacred altar for people coming from all over the world to these holy lands. Christ left the cross and crown of thorns to the earthly king. Probably, this fact is directly correlated with the assassination of Alexander II, on the site of whose death in St. Petersburg the Church of the Savior on Spilled Blood was erected. Love illuminates the earth, warming the hearts of people instead of the “faded sun.” The revival of the human soul by love is similar to the renewal that occurs in nature in spring. For Fet, spring is a holiday of new life, the triumph of the Almighty, the Resurrection of Christ, therefore, in his spring poetry, a significant place is occupied by references to the New Testament, to Russian Orthodox life, which are intertwined with motifs characteristic of Fet, as, for example, in the poem “Spring”: Although I won’t be ashamed for a moment, You can't stand in front of eternal beauty Don't sing, don't praise, don't pray. In the poem “Christ is Risen” (March 31, 1879), the poet sends Easter greetings to P.I. Botkin: “Christ is Risen!” - spring cry; To whom should I send it in verse, How not to the one who in the autumn rain And in January - with a flower in your hands? About the heavy cross of life. But now is the feast of atonement, Days of renewal miracles, - So be healthy, congratulations Repeating: “Truly risen!” 342. “Days of Renewal Miracles” are a special time for every believer. The same “time of miracles” is the Christmas season. In the poem “The Night is Silent. In the unsteady firmament...” Fet presents to our eyes the Nativity icon and its religious content, worthy of universal admiration: The night is quiet. On the unsteady firmament No ears, no extra glances, - A star choir to another choir Gold, myrrh and Lebanon. (p. 386) The solemn silence of the night is illuminated by the light of a star, which leads the wise men and shepherds with gifts to the Newborn. A choir of angels and stars fills the air with festive song. In Fet's poetry, stars often appear together with angels as heralds of the word of God: Heaven told her: “Sleep!” – “Eternal – holy, holy, holy!” No movement - only sometimes “Quiet at night on the steppe...” (P. 152) The first stanza of this poem contains a quotation from the Orthodox liturgy "By Grace of Peace" "Holy, holy, holy", which is sung before Communion. According to V. A. Shenshina, in the line “The sky told her: “Sleep!”,” heaven and earth merged into one feminine soul of the universe, the idea of which was later developed in his philosophy of Eternal Femininity by V. S. Soloviev. After the death of M. Lazic, the theme of eternal love is constantly present in Fet’s love lyrics. The poet addresses his beloved beyond the physical boundaries of life and death, for death has no power over the immortal soul of man. The same can be seen in a poem from the collection “Melodies” of 1882: In the suffering of bliss I stand before you - And a young soul looks into my eyes. I stand, covered in another life, - I am not speaking from here, I am speaking from heaven. (p. 172) Fet often implements the motif of the immortality of the soul and eternal life in the timeless present, in contrast to the motifs from the Bible and the New Testament set out in the perspective of historical time, in order to emphasize his belief in the special purpose of the soul, which has been granted immortality by God. The eternal life of the poet’s soul is aimed at “contemplating the visible beauty and glory of God in it” 343, filled with “quiet” prayers addressed to the Lord. This is how Fet appears in his work and communication with spiritually close people. As a mortal man, he bowed to the Almighty for his poetic gift, like an eternal fire in his chest. Therefore, it is impossible to talk about the denial of God (especially consistent) in Fet’s life or work. Of course, biographical data indicates Fet’s complex attitude towards the ritual side of the Russian Church, but also allows us to trace the change in his religious feelings towards the end of his life, to note the poet’s churching (letters to K.P. ) The conscious (“head”) acceptance of the official church, attested by the writer himself in his letters and memoirs, and the understanding of Orthodoxy in the lyrics most fully reflect the religious and poetic world of the poet, which brings Fet’s fundamentally Christian work closer to the traditions of Russian classical literature. Abrashova E.A. A.P.’s attitude Chekhov (based on the writer’s notebooks and letters) About faith and unbelief A.P. Chekhov, the opinions of scientists are too ambiguous, and often simply contradictory. So, D.S. Merezhkovsky argued that Chekhov passed by Christ, and Fr. Sergius Bulgakov believed that Chekhov was steadily approaching the Christian faith. Scientists address the topic of the spiritual orientation of the writer’s creativity - S.S. Averintsev, V.B. Kataev, N.I. Prokofiev, G.A. Shalyugin, M.L. Semanova, M.M. Dunaev, S.Yu. Nikolaeva and many others, often based on works of art. However, the problem of Chekhov’s faith can also be examined based on the material of his notebooks of 1891–1904. At the same time, perhaps, it is worth listening to the words of the writer: “If you want to become an optimist and understand life, then stop believing what they say and write, but observe and delve into it for yourself” 344. Chekhov writes: “The trouble is that we try to solve the simplest questions cunningly, and therefore make them unusually complex. We need to look for a simple solution” (98). A fair remark, especially in relation to many researchers of Chekhov’s work. Everyone knows Chekhov’s saying: “Between “there is a God” and “there is no God” there lies a whole huge field, which a true sage passes through with great difficulty. A Russian person knows one of these two extremes, but the middle between them is not interesting to him, and he usually knows nothing or very little” (19). This statement will also be valid in relation to Czech scholars. In their works, Chekhov either goes to faith and leads his heroes to it, or leaves it, showing the impossibility of resurrecting the soul. At best, both options are accepted. It seems that some researchers first, by some unknown means, come to a certain point of view, and then try to find evidence of their theory in the works, notebooks and letters of Chekhov. And the most amazing thing is that they find it. Chekhov's notebooks contain observations of various kinds of life situations, people's statements, plot sketches for future works, and much more. “You open your notebook,” writes 3.S. Paperny, and in front of you is a chaotically motley picture. But the more you look, the clearer it becomes: the movement here is not random, it follows certain routes. At first everything is colorful, interrupting itself - then internal order, hidden organization begins to emerge” 345. It cannot be said that everything written by Chekhov in his notebooks is a norm, an ideal or a call to action for the author, but there is no doubt that all these statements were interesting to him. Z.S. Paperny believes that “in a certain sense, every record is significant and important: by the very fact of writing, the author seems to sign that he needs it as a preparation, a missing detail, a vaguely imagining plan, or, conversely, a denouement” 346. Some notes will remain only in notebooks, some will be transferred to works of art. But in any case, the topic of faith and unbelief will be interpreted as nothing other than a problem. This happens due to the ambiguity of the approach to the issue, due to the lack of a clear author’s assessment. “The more you look at these books, the less frozen they seem. Gradually, the quiet and tireless movement of the records, their secret, rich life, is revealed" 347. In Chekhov's notebooks the same rule applies as in his works of art: there is no solution, but there is a problem, shown from different sides. From the very first pages of the notebooks of 1891–1904, Chekhov's approach to this issue is recognizable. “Why did Hamlet bother about visions after death, when life itself is visited by more terrible visions?” - writes Chekhov (14). It immediately becomes clear that the problem will be shown through the prism of real, everyday, everyday situations in which ordinary, living, real people act. That is, we can say that the problem of faith, the situation of choice will be described objectively. In our opinion, V.B. adheres to the same point of view. Kataev, saying that “Chekhov’s worldview and his deeds are adequate to the real embodiment of Christian ideals” 348. The lack of a clear author's position is not Chekhov's detachment from this topic, but an eternal situation of search, constant reflection, the opportunity to discover more and more new horizons. In a word, everything that life presents to us every day: “Go and walk up the ladder, which is called civilization, progress, culture - go, I sincerely recommend it, but I really don’t know where to go. This ladder alone is worth living for” (20). It is worth living for the sake of life, for the sake of this endless movement. “A person cannot live without faith,” we read just a few lines later. It seems that we have found out where to go. And therefore, the well-noticed worldly wisdom that “a hungry dog ​​believes only in meat” sounds like a terrible revelation (27). “Faith is a faculty of the spirit. Animals do not have it; savages and undeveloped people have fear and doubt. It is available only to high organizations” (50). Concise, dry, scientific. It remains to accept this as a fact. Here Chekhov the physician speaks, Chekhov the scientist. But in the next entry we see Chekhov the writer reflecting on such a topic as death: “Death is terrible, but even more terrible would be the knowledge that you will live forever and never die” (50). It is interesting how this entry develops further: “Only that which is amenable to our five senses dies in a person, and that which is outside these senses, which is probably enormous, unimaginably high and beyond our senses, remains to live” (67). Chekhov’s conviction is clearly visible here: there is no need to impose one’s point of view, everyone is free to act as freely as they allow themselves: “what a person believes in, that is what it is” (76). This is a deeply correct judgment about the existence and death of man: after all, man is created in the image and likeness of God, which means he is free to choose his life path. The following statement is interesting because two of Chekhov’s elements - scientific (medicine) and literary - peacefully coexist in the text, showing different views on the problem posed and even, to some extent, the need for such a versatile approach. “When you are thirsty, it seems that you will drink the whole sea - this is faith; and when you start drinking, you only drink two glasses—that’s science” (78). Chekhov's ability to look at any concept differently gives his artistic style of writing even greater objectivity. Along with serious logical arguments, there is another, slightly ironic, although not without a certain amount of skepticism: “there is nothing that history has not sanctified” (79). This is another point of view on the problem posed. And a little later, a note with a completely different mood: “Not a single measure is suitable for judging non-existence, about what a person is not” (86). It would seem that all previous statements are crossed out by this phrase. The following lines sound like a reflection on the topic of man: “The old man did not believe in God because he almost never thought about Him; magpie, animal life” (97). This is one of the few statements where the author's description of the intended character is openly given. Moreover, this is the deep Christian position of the author. It can be assumed that the following two statements express the author’s position on the problem posed. “Until then, man will go astray, seek a goal, be dissatisfied, until he finds his God. You cannot live for the sake of children or humanity. And if there is no God, then there is nothing to live for, one must perish”; “A person must either be a believer or seeker of faith, otherwise he is an empty person” (98). So, we tried to highlight the notes in the notebooks of 1891–1904 concerning Chekhov’s religiosity. We can say that the diversity of points of view on this topic allows us to talk about its problematic nature. V.B. Kataev notes: “It was this state of eternal search, the feeling of life not as being in a found solution - faith, but as an eternal problem that became the basis of his artistic masterpieces” 349, which allows us to talk about Chekhov as an objective artist at the level of not only plot works, but also small isolated statements. Chekhov's notebooks are the writer himself, who constantly stated: “In order to solve questions about wealth, death and others, you must first pose these questions correctly, and this requires long-term mental and spiritual work” (100). No less interesting is the consideration of the issue of Chekhov’s religiosity based on the material of his letters. They were analyzed in detail by M.M. Dunaev in the book “Orthodoxy and Russian Literature”. In a letter to his brother Mikhail, dated April 1879, Anton Pavlovich wrote: “Recognize your insignificance, you know where? Before God, perhaps, before intelligence, beauty, nature, but not before people. Among people you need to be aware of your dignity.” And further: “Do not confuse “resign yourself” with “realize your insignificance”” 350. This statement is reminiscent of the first beatitude: “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for of them is the kingdom of heaven.” Spiritual poverty is called humility, which makes it possible to know ourselves, to correctly evaluate our strengths and weaknesses. “But Christian humility must be strictly distinguished from selfish self-abasement, which degrades human dignity” 351. This is exactly what Chekhov tried to instill in his brother. According to M.M. Dunaeva, here “Chekhov expressed faith in man as a creature bearing within himself the image of God: only on this basis can one recognize one’s dignity over other people. Beauty and nature are here a manifestation of the greatness of the Creator. Chekhov recognizes humiliation of oneself before Him as humility” 352. The author proposed an interesting code of a well-mannered person to his brother N.P. Chekhov in a letter of 1886. “Educated people, in my opinion, must satisfy the following conditions: 1. They respect the human personality, and therefore are always condescending, gentle, polite, compliant... 2. They are not only compassionate towards beggars and cats. They are sick in their souls and from what cannot be seen with the naked eye. So, for example, if Peter knows that his father and mother are turning gray with melancholy and do not sleep at night due to the fact that they rarely see Peter (and if they do, they are drunk), then he will rush to them and spit on the vodka. 3. They respect other people's property, and therefore pay debts. 4. They are sincere and fear lies like fire. They don't lie even about trifles. A lie is offensive to the listener and vulgarizes the speaker in his eyes. They do not show off, they behave on the street the same way as at home, they do not throw dust in the eyes of the smaller brethren... They are not talkative and do not barge in with frankness when they are not asked... Out of respect for other people's ears, they are often silent. 5. They do not humiliate themselves for the purpose of arousing sympathy in others. They do not play on the strings of other people's souls, so that in response they sigh and coddle them. 6. They are not vain. They are not interested in such fake diamonds as dating celebrities. 7. If they have talent, they respect it. They sacrifice peace, women, wine, vanity for him... 8. They cultivate aesthetics in themselves” 353. Here we observe Christian prudence that organically entered into Chekhov’s worldview. Another statement by A.P. does not at all contradict Christian morality. Chekhov in a letter to A.N. Pleshcheev on October 4, 1888: “My holy of holies is the human body, health, mind, talent, inspiration, love and absolute freedom from force and lies, no matter what the last two are expressed in” 354. According to Christian teaching, man is three-part and consists of body, soul and spirit. These concepts were listed by Chekhov. Within the framework of the Christian canon, it is necessary to keep the soul pure and strive for God in spirit - this is indisputable. But “the word of God commands us to keep our bodies clean, because our bodies “are members of Christ and temples of the Holy Spirit.” “Fornicators sin against their own body, weaken the health of their body, expose it to disease and damage even the faculties of the soul” 355. In a letter to A.N. To Pleshcheev on April 9, 1889, Chekhov formulated his life credo: “The norm is not known to me, just as it is not known to any of us. We all know what a dishonorable act is, but we don’t know what honor is. I will stick to the framework that is closer to my heart and has already been tested by people stronger and smarter than me. This frame is absolute freedom from violence, from prejudice, ignorance, the devil, freedom from passions, etc.” 356. Freedom from violence comes from fulfilling the sixth commandment: “Thou shalt not kill.” The first commandment saves from prejudice, ignorance, and the devil: “I am the Lord thy God, thou shalt have no gods other than Me.” The second commandment helps to fight passions: “Do not make yourself an idol...”. In the Law of God, these words are explained as follows: “For us Christians, idolatry, in the form to which all pagans are devoted, is impossible. But instead of gross idolatry, there is a more subtle idolatry among us. Such idolatry includes serving sinful passions, such as: covetousness, gluttony, pride, vanity, etc.” 357. Another interesting feature can be noted when reading Chekhov’s letters. “The name of Christ appears extremely rarely in Chekhov’s letters. Some of them are in Easter greetings: Christ is risen! This is also important: not tolerating lies and pretense, Chekhov would not have said this if he had perceived it only as an empty etiquette formality,” writes M.M. Dunaev 358. This undoubtedly subtle observation allows us to note a very important detail. In his letters, Chekhov uses the church calendar. Like any churchgoer, he writes, for example, not April 25, but “in the second week after Easter,” or the week of the current Lent is indicated. So, in a letter to H.A. To Leikin from 1883: “For Trinity I will send you something green, and la “Vellow.” On the first day of Easter I sent you a story.” M.E. Chekhov in April 1886: “I am writing to you, my dear uncle, on Good Friday, just before Saturday, but since this letter will be received by you after the 13th, I have every right to kiss you in absentia three times, to receive from you the answer “He is truly risen,” and, if you allow, then a ten-kopeck piece. So: Christ is risen." Or in a letter to Al. To P. Chekhov dated February 25, 1890: “Everything you need to do will be found in the letter that you will receive in the 4th or 5th week of Lent.” There are a great many such examples. I would also like to note that most often in Chekhov’s letters the bright holiday of Easter is mentioned - in this Chekhov adheres to the Orthodox division of the year, where the main count of time is from Easter to Pentecost. So, Chekhov’s notebooks and letters testify to the writer’s genuine religiosity, which requires extensive special study. Vasneva A.M. The life and work of the Orthodox children's writer A.F. Platonova The list of Orthodox children's magazines beloved by Russian readers that were published in Russia before the terrible events of October 1917 is quite long. A special place among them is occupied by the magazine “Forget-Me-Not,” published by the remarkable children’s writer and teacher A.F. Platonova. Readers became acquainted with the creative activity and themes of the writer’s works during her years of study at the gymnasium at the beginning of the century, when she published poems and stories on religious topics in Orthodox magazines. Alexandra Fedorovna was born into the noble family of the painter and icon painter F.K. Platonov (1884–1937), who took part in the painting of the churches of the Ioannovsky Monastery on Karpovka. It is known that this monastery is most closely connected with the great saint of God - Righteous John of Kronstadt. After graduating from high school, Alexandra Fedorovna decided to connect her destiny with teaching and entered the Imperial Pedagogical Institute. Then, before the onset of revolutionary events, she was engaged in teaching at the women's school of Princess Theresa of Oldenburg and at the Petrovskaya women's gymnasium. While conducting classes with students, she realized that they needed to be given additional material on the history of the Russian state and church, about saints and ascetics. In 1912 A.F. Platonova released a collection of her early stories and poems, “At the Heights of the Spirit.” Her fame as a writer and poet grew. In 1912–1917 she was a regular contributor to the popular magazine “The Kronstadt Shepherd”. In 1913, three of her books were published: “At Dawn”, “Under the Shadow of Faith” and “Bright Distances”. The book “At Dawn” was a collection of stories about the life of early Christians, the second was a collection of articles on religious and moral topics, and in the third, Platonova again returned to the first centuries of Christianity, to the cruel persecution of pagans against those who entrusted their lives to the Lord God and trusted in Him to the end. The beginning of the writer’s work coincided with the pre-storm war and pre-revolutionary years. Anxiety has already settled in the souls of many Russian people, anxiety for the moral state of all classes of Russian society from the common people to the priesthood, for the Russian Orthodox Church, for the future of Russia. People who shared the views of A.F. Platonova, they understood that a great misfortune was coming to the country and everyone in their place needed to show all possible resistance to the ideas of destruction and deviation from the foundations of the state structure and the Orthodox way of life in Russia. A.F. Platonova did not think for a long time about what place she should take in this struggle. She decided to use all her strength on the Orthodox education of the people and, above all, children, since it was with the Orthodox faith that she linked the salvation of Russia. Alexandra Feodorovna decided in 1914 to publish her own children's Orthodox magazine with the simple and at the same time heartfelt name “Forget-Me-Not,” where she dreamed of expressing herself as an experienced spiritual teacher. Throughout 1914, she worked fruitfully in the magazine “Forget-Me-Not” and wrote a lot on Orthodox topics. Her collections “Great Days”, “Wonderful is God in His Saints”, “To Perfect Joy” are published. Stories, poems”, “God is not in power, but in truth. Essays and stories from the last World War" and the book "Apostle of Japan", dedicated to the famous Russian missionary Archbishop Nikolai (Kasatkin). As can be seen from the title of the latest collection, the writer immediately responded to the great misfortune that came to her dear Russia. A.F. Platonova stood on her Orthodox and patriotic position to the end; the magazine was closed with the beginning of revolutionary events. All spiritually beneficial Orthodox works immediately fell into the category of “harmful”; the new government’s work was A.F. It was alien to Platonova. Just before the revolution of 1917, she published her last openly published book, “Above the Dnieper Mounds,” which was entirely devoted to the life of Kievan Rus. After the revolution A.F. Platonova continues to serve Russia not with her creativity, but with prayer and preaching; she became close with the sisters of the Ioannovsky Monastery on Karpovka, with whom she was friends before. In 1921, Alexandra Feodorovna became nun Anastasia, and was tonsured by Metropolitan Veniamin (Fedchenkov), a future martyr, known throughout the Russian Orthodox Church. She found the strength in herself, as a nun, to write several stories that were understandable and close to all Orthodox Christians at that time: “About the Cross”, “About Calvary”, “Eleven Sunday Gospels”, as well as the poem “For the Church” with an encouraging call not to be afraid of death and suffering, if necessary - to go to the cross without giving up Christ. Nun Anastasia remained faithful to Russia and the Russian Orthodox Church until the end of her days, rejected the offer to join the Renovationist Church, remained with her sisters and was arrested on December 22, 1933. On February 25, 1934, the court sentenced nun Anastasia to five years in the camps. Further traces of her life are lost. There is indirect information that she died in 1937. Mother Anastasia is an example of an integral person; she remained faithful to Russia and the Orthodox Church all her life. Activities of A.F. Platonova in the magazine “Forget-Me-Not” should be considered in the closest connection with the facts of her biography. Alexandra Fedorovna sought to use the pages of the magazine entrusted to her for the Orthodox and patriotic education of the people; she wanted the reader, opening the next issue of Forget-Me-Not, to see in it every time that sweet and modest flower, looking at which people remember the sky. Explaining the name of her magazine, in the first issue she cited a pious folk legend about how the said flower got its name: “There is a legend among people that angels, flying over the earth, drop blue flowers on it so that people do not forget about heaven. That’s why these flowers are called forget-me-nots” 359. The monthly literary and artistic illustrated magazine “Forget-Me-Not” was intended for children aged 8–12 years. A talented writer taught on the pages of her magazine to forget about oneself for the sake of love for God and one’s neighbors. Such edifying reminders – “living forget-me-nots” – were published on its pages. The goal of the magazine was to provide not only artistic, interesting reading, but also to have a beneficial effect on the development of the child’s soul, to awaken and strengthen in children love and interest in everything native. Considering the high demands the editors set for themselves (represented by A.F. Platonova and Archpriest A. Temnomerov), one can explain the selection of authors, the high spiritual level, the thoroughness and noble taste of the material presented. The content of “Forget-Me-Not” was varied: historical and everyday stories and stories, poems, popular science articles, a place was given to charades, puzzles, and there was a page “Conversation with the reader.” Articles about animals and plants as close friends of man evoked sympathy; the child was instilled with the kindest attitude towards them. In a word, the magazine instilled in children a love for God's world. “Forget-Me-Not” had religious-moral, literary, popular-scientific departments, sparkles and a mixture. A.F. Platonova knew how to create elegant stories, novellas, essays and poems, filled with the Orthodox spirit and at the same time edifyingly unobtrusive. After the outbreak of the First World War, the content of her works expanded due to the emergence of a military theme: stories were published about the heroism of Russian soldiers who valiantly fought for their fatherland, about the selfless service of doctors and nurses caring for the wounded and sick. With heightened sensitivity to goodness and mercy, the writer tried to give examples from military life in which the moral parallels of the exploits of selfless brotherly service on the battlefield of ordinary soldiers and the medical personnel who followed in their ranks with the life of the ancient saints, their service to the sick and infirm were clearly visible. Therefore, war stories appeared in almost every issue of the magazine. The pages of the magazine contained memorable stories from the lives of the great holy ascetics of the early years of Christianity and stories about the lives of Russian saints of God in recent times. Here are the names of some of the most interesting works of the spiritual direction, published on the pages of “Forget-Me-Not”: “The Quiet Star”, “Christ is Risen!”, “St. George’s Day”, “In the Vast Church”, “Morning Prayer”, “From the Life of St. Joseph”, “General “Father””, “Christ”, “On Christmas Night”, “Fortunately”, “First Confession”, “Nicholas’ Day”, “Anyuta”, “Les Miserable”, “In May”, “Over the Holy Book”, “For Our Friends”, “Blizzard”... Some of Alexandra Platonova's poems were so successful that they were copied by hand. Here is an excerpt from one such popular poem - “May my prayer be corrected!”: Before the holy altar there is a stream of incense - A child's voice sounds with pure, living faith: “May my prayer be corrected, O God, How I burned incense before You!” Silence hangs in the twilight of the church... Only silver chains can be heard rattling - And some kind of sweet sadness wave Suddenly she touched my weary soul... Before the holy altar there is a stream of incense - Good... And there is blessed peace in my soul - The editors of Forget-Me-Not tried to gather around themselves the best literary forces capable of developing good feelings and bright thoughts in Orthodox children. Among them were writers V. Suvorova, M. Chokoy, A. Sevastyanov, A. Turenskaya, M. Ilyina, A. Makarova-Mirskaya, D. Kaigorodov, E. Lvova, M. Klado, M. Solovyova, O. Belyaevskaya, K. Lukashevich, M. Tolmacheva, I. Popov-Permsky, V. Pospelov and others. Editorial staff member A.N. Sevastyanov published many stories and poems addressed to “little children” on the pages of the magazine. Here is one of his sweet poems - “Good Morning”, published in No. 5 for 1914: Good morning, little children! The sun has risen and is calling you. A ringing, vociferous song The "dormouse" swifts are teasing you. And the pond, full of languor, Waiting with obvious impatience, He'll be sleeping, it's time to get up, Look through your windows A.F.’s closest assistant Platonova in the magazine business was the writer Natalia Ivanovna Manaseina, known for her stories from the lives of Russian figures of the 18th century published in several children's magazines. In No. 3 of the Forget-Me-Not magazine for 1914, many people’s favorite poem was published by A.S. Pushkin, dedicated to the bright holiday of spring - the Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary - and the ancient tradition of releasing birds into the wild on this holiday. The sensitive soul of the people unmistakably chose this custom as a simple and earthly symbol, denoting the deep meaning of the holiday - the joyful news to the entire human race about the coming of the Savior to earth, about the future liberation of man from the slavery of sin and death. In the time of Pushkin, not only on the feast of the Annunciation, but also on the Holy Resurrection of Christ, there was a pious custom of releasing birds in captivity, often buying them from hunters. Alexander Sergeevich writes about this touching tradition, being in Moldova far from his native places, in a letter to N.I. Gnedich: “Do you know the touching custom of the Russian peasant to release a bird into the wild on Easter Sunday? Here are some poems for this: On the bright holiday of spring... Why should I grumble at God? When at least one creation The life of a Russian peasant passed among his native forests and fields, the dear traditions of “ancient antiquity” and the Orthodox worldview. For many centuries after the baptism of Rus', people associated all annual holidays with certain customs. This consolidated the Orthodox way of life, which the people tried to follow from birth to death. After the events of October 1917, the Forget-Me-Not magazine was published only once, in December, after which it was closed for ideological reasons. The new government really wanted “Forget-Me-Not” to be quickly forgotten. The editors in their last issue warned about the upcoming closure of the magazine, no longer hoping for a better future. But in order not to upset the beloved reader, instead of “goodbye” the editors write “goodbye!”, consoling him with these words: “God willing, a year will pass, he will enter the shores of the stormy sea of ​​Russian life and we will meet again. “Forget-me-not” will bloom again.” In all Russian libraries, Forget-Me-Not, like many other Orthodox magazines, was confiscated and destroyed. It has been preserved only in scattered form in the special collections of the country’s three central libraries (RSL, RNL, BAN). Works by A.F. Platonova and now have difficulty making their way onto the pages of children's collections and periodicals (the exceptions are the magazines "Kupel" and "Moscow"), even professional compilers in their review guides on children's literature of the 20th century do not mention her name. Alekseeva L.F. V.A. Sumbatov - Russian Orthodox poet The work of Prince Vasily Alexandrovich Sumbatov (1893–1977) forms a strong link in the history of Russian literature, connecting the 19th and 20th centuries, rushing into the 21st century. Although very little has so far been published abroad 360 and at home 361, one can be sure that very soon his poems and prose will be in demand by a wide range of domestic readers. In his legacy they will find a special understanding of Russian tragic history, loyalty to the Russian State, and inescapable faith in the supreme Grace and Justice of God. Vasily Aleksandrovich Sumbatov lived a life amazingly rich in events, courageous deeds and creative achievements. As the poet’s granddaughter Elena Sumbatova-Resta 362 testifies, from an early age the poet was associated with Orthodox culture: “As a child, my grandfather had a cheerful and open character, which gave him the opportunity to enjoy life and react to everything very lively” 363. One of the poet’s earliest memories was the impression of an Orthodox holiday service, during which the child received communion. V. Sumbatov’s autobiographical narrative “Childhood” opens with a significant introduction: “The earliest thing I remember is church. I don’t know which one and where. I don’t know how old I am, but I can already walk on my own. The nanny lifts me up in front of the priest and says: “Open your mouth.” The priest has a golden cup in his hands, and I think that the same cups are in our dining room, and I forget to open my mouth. Nanny tells me for the second time. “Open your mouth, Cornflower,” I open my mouth, and the priest gives me something sweet and fragrant, and another priest wipes my lips with a soft red handkerchief. Then the nanny says: “Kiss the cup,” but I don’t know what a cup is, and I look around.”364 After communion (most likely Easter), the child stumbled on the steps of the pulpit, but was picked up by caring hands. “Mom, sister, brothers and some other people surround me and kiss me, repeating the same incomprehensible phrase that the priest with the silver coffee pot told me. I understand that everyone is happy that I didn’t hurt myself, and I’m very pleased that everyone loves me so much...” 365. When the priest congratulated his flock, the boy felt surprisingly cheerful: “He says something very loudly, louder and louder, and finally shouts at the top of his lungs, and I feel terribly funny. I laugh, my mother and nanny calm me down, the nanny even clamps her hand over my mouth, and I cannot stop laughing. The nanny takes me in her arms and carries me out of the church” 366. Subsequently, this experience responded positively in various situations in life; the poet recognized this holiday as absolutely significant: “I don’t know whether the memory of this episode always made me smile at any loud sounds or whether loud sounds evoked memories of it, but I always felt cheerful at the sounds of thunder, cannon fire, loud music” 367. V. Sumbatov studied from the age of nine in the cadet corps, and from the age of twelve in a private gymnasium, where his classmates awarded him the flattering nickname Encyclopedia for his rich erudition. He felt a pure romantic feeling of love for the Tsar’s eldest daughter, Grand Duchess Olga. As a graduate of the gymnasium in the summer of 1914, the young prince went to the front as a volunteer. He served in the 88th Petrovsky Infantry Regiment 368, was promoted to non-commissioned officer and awarded the St. George Cross, 4th degree. Then he was seconded to the Corps of Pages and, after accelerated courses and promotion as an officer, he was appointed to the 3rd Hussar Elisavetgrad Regiment of Grand Duchess Olga, in which Vasily Alexandrovich rose to the rank of captain. In September 1916, in difficult battles in the Kovno direction, he was seriously wounded and shell-shocked. For a long time the poet did not regain consciousness. Finally, when he began to get his bearings a little, he was sent with a convoy to Tsarskoe Selo, where he was treated in the infirmary at the church of the Fedorov Cathedral. After meeting with his beloved in the hospital, where the future saint came to visit the wounded and maimed, Captain Sumbatov was miraculously healed. Upon returning to Moscow after being discharged from the hospital, he found on the door of the house in which he grew up an advertisement that the new government was looking for him. To find out something about his mother 369, he went to the Svetloye estate 370, a hundred miles east of Moscow. It turned out that my mother died of shock upon receiving the news of the death of her fourth son in the fleet agitated by the revolution (the eldest died during the Russian-Japanese War, the second during the First World War, she also received a funeral for Vasily, apparently sent by his colleagues due to the hopelessness of his wound). Having learned from the peasants about the death of his mother, the prince returned to Moscow. A former colleague placed him in a gymnasium for boys, whose director, Nikolai Aleksandrovich Verigin, helped him escape from persecution by the revolutionaries. Acquaintance with the Verigin family became fateful for the poet. Nikolai Alexandrovich’s daughter Elena and Vasily fell in love with each other and went through a long and difficult, but full of light and happiness, life path together - until V.A.’s death. Sumbatova in 1977 (Elena Nikolaevna died in 1981). The young went to the location of the White Guard armies. After some respite in Perekop, they found themselves in Sevastopol, which by that time was occupied by the Reds. There, the Sumbatovs’ first daughter, Natalya, was born, who was baptized on board the ship that was taking the young family into exile. After a six-month stay on one of the Princes' Islands (Halki Island), where the poet washed floors in the restaurant of the officers' club to support his family, they were allowed to go to Rome, where Elena Nikolaevna had a relative - the priest of the Orthodox church, Fr. Christopher. In exile, Sumbatov was friends with the famous historian E.F. Shmurlo, who served in the Russian archives in the Vatican; he also became close to the founder of the Young Russians party, Duke G.N. Leuchtenbergsky, corresponded with the poets Y. Terapiano, D. Klenovsky (some of the letters have been preserved). The critic Antar (A. Rennikov) wrote a review of the first book of poems (Munich, 1922), the poet Yu. Trubetskoy responded to the second (Milan, 1957), Y. Gorbov, editor-in-chief of the magazine "Renaissance", reviewed the collection "Transparent Darkness". Sumbatov had a particularly close relationship in the 1920s with an employee of the Russian embassy in Rome, I.A. Persian, whose archive partially ended up in RGALI. Remaining disabled throughout his life after being wounded and shell-shocked, Sumbatov earned his living by making artistic miniatures. Being a good graphic artist and watercolorist, he won the competition and received the right to design papal bulls. But when the Vatican found out that he was not a Catholic, they demanded that he change his religion. Despite the fact that the work in the Vatican was well paid, and the family was in dire need, the poet flatly refused to fulfill the conditions presented and remained committed to Orthodoxy until the last hour. Already the first collection, published in Munich, testified that the poet was a deeply and sincerely believing Orthodox Christian. The sky for him is not an empty space of lifeless space 371. Poetic prayers filled with reverence, for example: Pour peace and joy into my soul! 372 In a review of the second collection, Yu. Trubetskoy wrote: “V. Sumbatov is no stranger to prayerful meditation, which, of course, is very good, especially considering our dull gray and faithless age” 373. The era of revolutions and wars tempered the poet, his heart was filled with courage, and the awareness of the participation of higher powers in earthly trials strengthened faith and revealed a special sense of independence from the petty, vain. In the poem “The Wanderer,” written in the 1920s, he emphasized the fearlessness of his lyrical hero and revealed the reasons for his inner strength. Having finished with the long-standing melancholy, To those who have seen God's wrath, Human anger is not terrible 374. The title of the third book – “Transparent Darkness” – has many meanings. The first meaning is autobiographical: many poems were created when the poet lost his sight, was preparing for surgery, and then was blind after surgery. However, the darkness did not obscure his impressions of previous events and modern times. Life remained bright for his inner perception. Another meaning of the name implies man's providential ability to discern divine essences behind the darkness of evil. The collection opens with the poem “Angel,” dedicated to his wife Elena Nikolaevna. Behind him are many trials he has experienced together, and the poet is filled with gratitude to his faithful, active wife, whose gracious participation enlightens and spiritualizes his life: You are full of kindness and patience, You understand me without words, You are my hope for enlightenment, You are my protection and cover. And under this blessed cover My spirit blossomed with new knowledge, I have a mysterious new vision I see your angelic halo 375. Yakov Gorbov rightly wrote about this poem: “In order to say what is said in these lines, you need such a reserve of spiritual and mental strength, such unshakable faith that everyone who has read “Angel” can only bow humbly and with concentration” 376. The poem “Half a Century Nearby,” as you might guess, is dedicated to the 50th anniversary of our marriage. No matter how bitter it is to state, most families, over the years spent together, lose the feeling with which they began their journey together. The Sumbatovs are a rare exception here. The love that warms the hearts of spouses is understood by the poet as a religious feeling, as a real connection between lovers and God. A candle appears here as a symbol of life and love, for unanimous companions - a common one. Hand to hand, shoulder to shoulder We carry to the last threshold. Candle fire – warmth and light Love, trust, understanding - We saved in the midst of Russian troubles And amidst the vicissitudes of exile. Fire to death's threshold. And that's all we pray to God for, To cross the threshold together. (p. 11). The poet perceived the immortality of the soul as something real from childhood. The surprisingly warm memory of what he observed at the beginning of his life was illuminated in a poem, in Tyuchev’s two-part style 377, with the somewhat ironic title “Two Souvenirs” (dedicated to Vladimir Smolensky). One memorable item is a dried orange with crackling seeds, reminiscent of the bride’s white flowers, that is, of love. The other one can be called a souvenir with great reservations, because the hostess didn’t call it that, maybe she didn’t even know the word. But the small “souvenir” contains such a memory, a child’s confidence in the inexhaustibility of life and love, that it is simply a miracle how the poet was able to talk about it simply, touchingly, without excessive sentimentality. And I see an Easter egg Half a century lain in the shrine At the nanny's, and flashing knitting needles In her hands, and a kind face. - Grisha christened them with me, My betrothed, she will begin the story, And again, not for the first time, I hear about Grisha, the deceased groom. War, recruitment, the groom will go on a campaign And he will never return to his bride... Then the nanny suddenly sighs and smiles And, taking the egg, he shakes it over my ear; Something is tapping in the dry egg. -Who lives in it? - I’ll ask, barely breathing, And the nanny will say: “Grishina’s soul!” – And again he will lay the egg at the icon case. (pp. 10–11) The poet felt the participation of extraterrestrial substances in earthly experiences as a beauty inexplicable in words, but dissolved in earthly and cosmic life, whose Solovyov name he accepted as his native one - Sophia, - the Wisdom of God, “a fiery angel”, “a living element”, the fire of which illuminates “all earthly philosophy” at all times. To comprehend it, you need not wisdom, but faith, spiritual purity: And opened in eternal glory Only simply - to believing hearts. (p. 35) A double metaphor determines the structure of the poem “Two Bridges,” which revives the traditions of the Young Symbolists-Solovyovites and their predecessor and “idol” F.I. Tyutcheva. The work is focused on the presence of the eternal in the ordinary, inconspicuous, modest. Grace and restraint, a special measure of beauty, determine the laconic and yet infinitely voluminous sound of the work. Let's present it in full. Opened up on a branch of stars A bridge is thrown from the sky to the ground This night cannot be compared with anything, - So light and transparent the shadow, It's like it's not even night at all, And the silver star day. You are silent, but clearer than the stars I like your tender glances, A bridge has been built between us From unspoken words of love. (p. 17) Let us pay attention to the fact that the main theme of the book continues to develop here - the theme of the permeability of darkness, its overcoming by the light of stars and the light of love, a light that intensifies against the background of silence, silence, the unspokenness of that which has no definitions in the language of logic. At the same time, the poet emphasizes the exclusivity of such a night, when the perception of the blooming sky is exposed to the human gaze and the feeling of a “bridge” uniting the souls of lovers is quite accessible to the senses. The author captured the moment of beauty blossoming as grace, nourishing both the universe and human lives in equal measure. This is the moment of truth that is revealed to “simple believing hearts.” It is contrasted with the moment of loss unfolded in the poem “Forever” - equally spiritual, but completely bitter. As in its predecessors, the collection “Transparent Darkness” contains many nostalgic motifs and references to the signs of Orthodox Russia that are dear to the heart from childhood. In the poem “Motherland”, dedicated to Prince S.A. Shcherbatov, there are lines that speak of living love for the Fatherland, separation from which could not drown out the memory: In the streams of the Tiber I see the waves of the Neva, St. Petersburg palaces reflections, In the distant bells I hear the gospel of Moscow, The overflow of church singing. (p. 6) In the “Testament,” the poet asks to scatter his ashes over the Russian fields, so that he can feed the seeds of the crops, even if only with a spark, so that he can be present in the grain future of his country. The poet anticipates many things with amazing accuracy; These experiences are by no means optimistic, but faith provides a source of hope and will prevent immersion in the darkness of the grave: Will I get to where everything is familiar - Into the expanse of my native land, Will death slam in front of me? Although hope is in full bloom, Though faith proudly despises The graves are rotten and dark. (p. 8) The reviewer, based on his own impressions of the poetic works of V. A. Sumbatov, drew attention to the peculiarities of their perception and impact on the soul: “Reading these poems has a calming, relaxing effect, even if there was in them, as, for example, in “Transparent Darkness,” more than dramatic internal content” 378. The fact is that the hero has reached such maturity, such a height from which no obstacles can hinder love, and the hero, who was physically blind, had spiritual vision opened, as if he, myopic, had been provided with the most necessary glasses, thanks to which he sees “everything as it really is” And even more - the essence of ideas And now I see feelings deeper, Whom I loved - I love more strongly And I don't hate anyone. (p. 13) The basis of life in Sumbatov’s lyrics is understood as fidelity to love, contemplation of the divine beauty of the world, memory of the past. Live, see, hear and love And became smoke. (p. 13) The tragic fractures of the 20th century brought their own dissonances into the soul, but the pure heart of the poet does not betray his main calling. Many poems in the book bring to light the main questions for the reader: about the meaning of life, courage in the face of death, about suffering and doubt, the bitterness of loss and immortality, the Orthodox faith. One of the co-editors of the Canadian-Italian magazine “Sovremennik” E.I. Bobrova wrote about the last book of the Russian Italian: “The darkness-disaster is gone: and the light that permeates V. Sumbatov’s entire book allows us to look with him into the poet’s world, which is unfamiliar to us. The poet saw noon and “...memory jealously / Preserves this noon like a miracle...”. She not only preserves it from memory: with sparkling splashes she splashes onto the pages of the book “the hot shine of the sapphire sky”, and “a dazzling revelry of colors”, “and a solemn crown of clouds... over the majestic Etna.” The poet is now the sovereign ruler of this memory; it is easier for him to restore order there, to discard the petty in the name of what is most important to him. The victorious spirit became more “spacious” on earth” 379. The numerous impressions of life in Sumbatov’s creative world do not turn into chaos. The poet owes a lot in his acquisition of the right guidelines, including meetings with wonderful people who had a beneficial effect on him. Among such teachers is the famous historian, connoisseur of Russian literature, guardian of the values ​​of Russian culture abroad E.F. Shmurlo 380. Sumbatov perceived his influence as very beneficial. In the sonnet “Evgeniy Frantsevich Shmurlo” (1922), he expressed gratitude to his older friend for his help in distinguishing between true and dubious milestones. The final part lyrically vividly and laconically summarizes the attitude towards the scientist: I thank you for distinguishing A living thought from rags and rot And you taught me to come true from dreams, How, many years ago, my mother taught me Paviliki should not be confused with night blindness, Do not mix violets and carnations with Datura... 381 Subsequently, the circle of amazing acquaintances expanded. Many of the encounters and paths of poetry to the reader were truly remarkable. D. Klenovsky described this in a letter dated October 15, 1959 to Fr. John, Archbishop of San Francisco (Shakhovsky), the second book of Sumbatov’s lyrics (Milan, 1957): “I received from Italy from a certain V. Sumbatov a collection of his poems, published in 1957. There are good and even excellent poems in it, and some on religious topics. The book is somehow very conducive to the author, a person who is spiritually, apparently, very pure” 382. This characteristic could not more accurately characterize the personality of V.A. Sumbatova. Being a modest, demanding person, he subordinated all his talent as a poet, artist, and citizen to service for the glory of God. Poems, most of them created abroad, await the attention of Orthodox readers in their homeland - the poet dreamed of such a return throughout his entire career. Visiting St. Seraphim Hieromonk Korniliy Apukhtin. To the Kursk origins In the early 1990s, after many years of militant atheism, through the prayers of Russian saints, our country began to awaken from spiritual slumber. Millions of people gained faith and found their way to the church. Then I began to search for the meaning and truth of human existence, wandering along the roads and crossroads. St. Seraphim helped me take the narrow Gospel road that leads to eternal life. Nothing has such a beneficial effect on a person’s soul as reading the Holy Scriptures and the lives of God’s saints. So I was deeply touched when I read the life of Father Seraphim for the first time. For some reason, he immediately became close and dear. St. Seraphim (in the world Prokhor Moshnin) is a native of the ancient Russian city of Kursk; he, like me, was raised by the Kursk land with its traditions, customs and special southern Russian dialect. The life of the saint is marked by the originality of his speech; the priest said: “To me, poor Serakhfim...”, adding an extra letter to his name, and this had a Kursk imprint. Elderly people in the Kursk region still say this. After reading the life of the saint, I wanted to become a monk and devote my life to serving God. I went to the Trinity-Sergius Lavra to see St. Sergius of Radonezh, whom Father Seraphim deeply revered, and then to Diveevo. A visit to this wonderful monastery made a great impression on me. It was still dilapidated, but here you could breathe easily, you forgot the vanity of this world. I walked along the groove, pronouncing the Archangel’s greeting to the Most Holy Theotokos: “Virgin Mother of God, Hail, O Blessed Mary, the Lord is with Thee: blessed art Thou among women, and blessed is the Fruit of Thy womb, for Thou hast given birth to the Savior of our souls,” but I wanted to go again and again. I touched the centuries-old poplars growing on the ditch, venerated the holy relics of the monk, bathed in the icy water of the holy springs and seemed to be reborn for spiritual life - I finally decided to find some monastery and asked Father Seraphim to show it to me, as the Kiev elder Dosifei once pointed out the Sarov monastery to a future ascetic. And so, by the will of God, I found myself in a small town near Moscow. After living for several months at a local church, which was later transformed into a monastery, he asked the abbot for permission to travel to his homeland to announce his intention to become a monk and receive his mother’s blessing. After all, once upon a time, young Prokhor was blessed by his mother with a large copper cross, which he wore throughout his difficult monastic life. But things don't always turn out the way we would like. Often good intentions are accompanied by temptations sent by the enemy of the human race. Once upon a time, the mother of St. Theodosius of Kiev-Pechersk, also a fellow countryman of Father Seraphim, in every possible way prevented her son from leaving for the monastery. And I had to partly experience the bitterness of refusal and misunderstanding of my mother, who, instead of parental blessing, rewarded me with words of reproach. I was upset to the point of tears that it didn’t turn out the way it did for St. Seraphim. With sadness I went to the church, which was built by the parents of Father Seraphim and from whose bell tower little Prokhor once fell without receiving the slightest damage. He venerated the image of the monk, mentally asking for help and guidance. Then he went to the recently opened Znamensky Cathedral, where there is a copy of the famous miraculous Kursk Root Icon, which once healed the future saint. Kneeling down, I fervently asked the Queen of Heaven to be my spiritual mother and bless me on my monastic path. For several centuries, my fellow countrymen fell before this holy image, asking for blessings for feats of arms, monastic service, asking for healing from incurable diseases, strength to endure life’s sorrows. Among them is my great-great-grandfather Nikifor - a man of quiet disposition, God-fearing and church-going. He lived in a village near Kursk, where pilgrims going to the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery often stopped, asking for accommodation for the night. One day a wanderer knocked on the house of grandfather Nikifor: “Dear man, let me spend the night, otherwise no matter what house I ask to go to, everyone refuses.” Grandfather loved wanderers and never neglected them. He showed the traveler due hospitality, and the next morning, saying goodbye, he handed him a pouch with grass seeds and ordered them to sow with wheat in the spring. That's what grandfather Nikifor did. That year there was a great drought, the entire harvest burned, and our wheat was so full that we had to hire half the village to harvest grain. So the Lord showed his mercy for the hospitality shown. When the First World War began, two sons of grandfather Nicephorus went to the front in the Tsar’s army and gave their lives for the faith and the tsar. Grandfather was greatly shocked by the news of the death of John and Tikhon, and with great sorrow he went barefoot in the bitter cold to the Kursk Root. What made him do this at that moment, only God knows. But grandfather returned home safe and sound, comforted by the Queen of Heaven. Why he went barefoot - either for heroic deeds, or out of great sorrow - remained a mystery. The skin on his legs was torn from the frost, and there were bloody footprints all over the road. Women came out of their houses, and some said: “Nikishka is our saint,” and others: “No, he’s gone crazy with grief.” May the Lord rest the servant of God Nicephorus in the villages of the righteous. More than two years have passed since I asked the Most Holy Theotokos in Kursk to become my spiritual mother and grant me an angelic image. And so, when the day of my initiation had not yet been scheduled, I approached the abbot of the monastery near Moscow in which I lived and asked when the tonsure would take place. The abbot took the church calendar and, without hesitation, indicated the date - December 10. It was the day of the celebration of the Kursk Root Icon of the Mother of God. I was deeply shocked and delighted, because the abbot did not know the episodes of my spiritual life. Kopytseva N.M. Come to me! Come! “When I’m gone, come to my grave. Walk as you have time. And the more often, the better,” said the reverend elder. Of my three pilgrimage trips to Diveevo, the first one was especially imprinted in the memory of my heart - in the last ten days of August 1992. However, the most burning experience from the meeting with the Monk Seraphim happened a little earlier. On January 11, 1991, in the Kazan Cathedral in Leningrad, the miraculously discovered relics of the Venerable Wonderworker of Sarov were returned to the Russian Orthodox Church. I will never forget what a wave of power washed over my entire being when, in fear and reverence, I bent over the open remains of the monk. So this “blow” remained in my heart forever. Then the holy relics were exhibited for veneration in the Epiphany Cathedral in Moscow, and by August 1 of the same year, according to the prophecies of St. Seraphim of Sarov, they were solemnly transferred to the Diveyevo Convent, created by the labors of the saint. Since then (at the same time they gave me an icon of St. Seraphim), I felt his invisible, but obvious presence in the space of my sinful existence. I was irresistibly drawn to Diveevo, to worship the miraculous elder. And although the vacation was coming to an end, I suddenly jumped on board and bought a ticket. And now the bus is rapidly rushing me to the holy monastery. On both sides of the road, the dense Sarov forest flashes in the distance - Seraphim lived there, and closer everything is flooded with a sea of ​​sunny dandelions. My soul is also sunny and festive: “My joy,” as if I hear above me, “Christ is Risen!” Here is blessed Diveevo, about the importance of love for which the monk said: “Happy is everyone who stays with the poor Seraphim in Diveevo for a day: from morning to morning; for the Mother of God, the Queen of Heaven visits Diveevo every day!” 383 There are a lot of people from all over Russia. The long-suffering one stretches out his hands, guiltily, but with hope, to the poor old man: “Reverend Our Father Seraphim, help us...”. He will hear and help... The poor, that is, the poor in spirit - theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven (Matthew 5:3). The Most Holy Lady Theotokos herself acknowledged: “This is our race.” The clan, the clan... Now the births have already begun to be meager. And we die quickly. But God lives, lives in His saints. The spring of living faith has not yet dried up. People come from all over the Russian countryside, fall in repentance with spiritual fear, with faith and love for the relics of God’s chosen one: “Reverend Our Father Seraphim, forgive, have mercy, help...”, plunge into the holy springs: “In the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit,” walk around with reverence and prayer several times a day the ditch along which they walked piles of the Most Holy Theotokos, partakes of the Holy Mysteries of Christ, and pours out “a quick helper in troubles and circumstances” on those who flow to him from the abundance and strength of his love, the grace of healing, bestows consolation, and intercedes in prayers. And the pilgrims depart for their bast, wooden, and stone dwellings, being careful not to spill the spiritual gold from Saint Seraphim with an unkind word, an awkward gesture in their souls, or scatter in the wind. On my first trip to Diveevo there were no buildings for pilgrims. But even then, the person coming here knew: the God-blessed Seraphim would not leave you without food, without shelter. We spent the night in the Kazan Cathedral (and others - in apartments), about which the monk predicted: “The Antichrist will pass, and he will all rise up into the air, and he will not be able to take him” 384. We got up at four in the morning, at five o’clock we gathered at the Seraphim-Diveyevo Church: we began to walk around the ditch with the “ruler” of St. Seraphim. Walking slowly around the ditch as long as possible, we fervently prayed for all our relatives and friends - living and dead. After which you can conceive your most cherished desire, and it will certainly come true. But the heart, overflowing with gratitude and joy (Glory to God for sorrow and joy), did not ask for anything - just so that the gentle voice in the soul would not be silent: “My joy! Christ is Risen!” Mother, who introduced us to the sights of Diveyevo on the first day of our arrival, told us how once, during the time of Mother Abbess Alexandra, one of the Diveyevo novices sighed: “If only I knew this minute, when the Lady goes around the monastery along the ditch!” “But live,” the mother abbess answered her, “all day as if at this time the Most Holy Theotokos was passing by you!” I remembered this covenant constantly after returning home, but I could not live according to it even for a single day. Father Vasily Sadovsky recalls: “Father Seraphim said a lot of wonderful things about this ditch. So, this groove is the Foot of the Mother of God! Here the Queen of Heaven herself walked around. This groove is sky high! The Most Pure Mother of God herself took this land as her inheritance. Here, father, I have Athos, Kyiv, and Jerusalem! And when the Antichrist comes, he will pass everywhere, but will not jump over this ditch!” 385. After going around the ditch - a special Diveyevo service with its wondrous chants; a visit to the cemetery (this silent witness and participant in life after life), where the nuns of the monastery are buried (about whom I had previously read in the “Chronicle of the Seraphim-Diveyevo Monastery” by Metropolitan Seraphim (Chichagov); reverent inspection of the things stored in the display cases of the monastery - relics of the holy elder, which are “conductors of God’s grace” 386; near and distant sources, scorching flame holy waters, calming inner battles, embracing soul and body with some unearthly cheerful lightness and sublimity of feelings. I remember that at that first meeting with Diveev, the feast of the Dormition of the Mother of God turned my soul - this last, final, of the great holidays of the annual church circle. Divine Liturgy, fervent prayers to the One who ascended to heaven to appear as our Intercessor, our Cover on earth. Appeals from the depths of the soul: “Rejoice, O Joyful One, who does not leave us in Your Assumption!” A warm, quiet evening in the language of the harsh north is already night: “like silent spectators / Stars look from the sky...”. The solemn majestic procession of the cross. Two rows of clergy, Diveyevo sisters, and pilgrims seem to be walking parallel to each other. Ahead of the first one moves a sea of ​​candles flaming towards the sky, highlighting the banners swaying in the savory air on the dark velvet of the southern evening. A solemn song sweeps over the silent earth: “At Christmas you preserved your virginity, / in the Dormition you did not abandon the world, O Mother of God, / you reposed to the belly, Mother of the life of the belly, / and through your prayers you delivered our souls from death.” For a long time, many months later, the unforgettable hymns of that day will burn the soul: “We magnify You, the Immaculate Mother of Christ our God, and we glorify Your all-glorious Dormition... Sing, people, to the Mother of our God, sing....” But all good things quickly end on the visible plane, echoing in the soul for the rest of our earthly life, fragrant in it as a wondrous oasis in the midst of earthly worries and troubles. It was necessary to return from Nizhny, southern, to our northern Novgorod, to begin service. Meanwhile, there were no promises of a ticket for the near future. There was not enough courage to decide to guard him at the Arzamas cash register for an unknown amount of time, leaving the holy places. And suddenly there was a pain in the pit of my stomach: here, right next door, is Boldino... Pushkin! Autumn! Now it's my time... And every autumn I bloom again - Bolshoye Boldino is the ancestral patrimony of Pushkin’s ancestors, where he came three times: in the fall of 1830, 1833 and 1834. The poet's stay here was short-lived. The famous Boldino autumn of 1830, as we know, was marked by an unprecedented rise in creative inspiration, bordering on a miracle (the poet would experience something similar in the Boldino autumn of 1833). Vyacheslav Ivanov is often cited as saying about the temporary coincidence of Pushkin’s creative rise with the period of the highest exploits of St. Seraphim (on August 28, 1830, he was honored with the appearance of the Most Holy Theotokos to him). - “The genius of Pushkin is, as it were, united with the spirit of the holy elder in the great work of transforming Russia” 387. Meanwhile, more than one Russian heart was embarrassed by the thought that two great contemporaries did not meet during their lifetimes. S.P. spoke very harshly on this matter. Bulgakov, who considered this fact fatal, negative in the poet’s life: “How could he not have heard of St. Seraphim, his great contemporary? How did the two suns of Russia not meet? – he asked 388 in bewilderment. And again: “The Rev. passed by. Seraphim, not accepting him" 389. But having asked this question, he himself answered it: “He had his own path and a special destiny - standing before God in the service of a poet” 390. So, I was irresistibly drawn to Pushkin’s southern estate. But isn’t it blasphemy: from Diveyevo - to Boldino, from St. Seraphim - to Pushkin... But I’m a philologist... But our students will go (?!) an unovergrown (as the poet foresaw) folk path from Pushkin (through his spiritual quest, delusions, rebellions and... “higher, let’s go higher,” - Pushkin’s last dying words) - to the holy wonderworker, to Heaven... My insatiable, sinful soul yearned and, remembering that I should ask only for the most necessary, I nevertheless prayed to the saint’s shrine so that he would do his mercy on me: give me a meeting with the poet beloved by all blessed Russia. The next morning we, several pilgrims, went to Sarov - the place of the holy elder’s feat. The acute sensation of his co-presence and the air filled with the smell of pine gave a second wind. They breathed easily and sang selflessly: There on the road under the pine trees After an hour and a half we emerge from the forest onto a wide country road: We sing to you, we bless you, we thank you, At this time, several newly arrived pilgrims enter the forest. In the hands of one of them something turns white: Mothers (everyone here calls each other “mothers” in an excess of feelings), doesn’t anyone need a ticket to Leningrad? - Necessary. I need it! God bless you! I fall at the venerable shrine in the Diveyevo church, thank you for the ticket and... ask for blessings on the trip to Boldino - to see Pushkin. Not without fear: the God-bearing saint of Christ will become angry, the priceless Sarov-Diveyevo oil will spill in his soul... I make my way through the dense crowd of worshipers to the Mother Abbess. Determination strengthens in my soul. Taking the blessing, I run to the bus station. I arrive in Arzamas: the bus to Boldino left about twenty minutes ago. I rush between buses. Suddenly I hear: “Sit down with me. We will catch up with them." Exactly an hour later, when it was supposed to turn aside, the second bus caught up with the first at the bus stop. He was about to drive off, but my compassionate driver shouted to stop... Another hour later I stood at the locked gates of the Boldinsky Nature Reserve. “Sanitary day” was hanging in front of my nose. “Reverend Father Seraphim...” with his hand to his forehead... The lock clanged. The dear guardian of the reserve patiently listened to the impatience of my heart and for a whole hour, in ringing silence, led me through Pushkin’s bright rooms, along alleys strewn with fallen leaves, lovingly revealing the reserve’s little secrets and reading the poet’s poems so inspiredly that it seemed that every leaf echoed gratefully in the tart transparent air. It was truly “crimson and gold” dressed in Pushkin’s Boldino autumn, even though it was still early. But in the south everything comes early. I seemed to know her well from her colorful albums, but I could not imagine that the reserve museum could be in such an economically disastrous state: the state budget (an old story) did not have funds for its improvement. But nature (it was the 156th autumn since the death of Pushkin and the 194th since the day of his birth) did not skimp and this time wonderfully decorate the cherished corner of the first Russian poet. Therefore, despite the spiritual stinginess of government officials, one could hear, in the words of the poet of the Silver Age, “in the sad funeral funeral the breath of bright name days.” It seems that I just entered Boldino: “Hello!..”, when I bowed gratefully after him: “Farewell!..”. So it is with everything in life: “Hello and goodbye!” - so as never to be separated again. I barely had time to get on the bus before it started moving. In the night train carriage I didn’t sleep a wink until the morning - there was no time for sleep. I remembered a poem by a remarkable poet of the 20th century, Vladimir Sokolov: In the far south, sunny and blue, So many glossy leaves, any kind. And we'll fly north, east, Where, having passed the test of disrepair, Every Boldino leaf turns yellow, As a bibliographic rarity. We started the first September lesson with students in Pushkin’s style: “Hello, tribe / Young, unfamiliar! not I / I will see your mighty late age... / But let my grandson / Hear your welcoming noise... / He will pass by you in the darkness of the night / And he will remember me.” The next year I was again irresistibly drawn to Diveevo, but I would like to talk about this trip separately. The third time I went to “visit Seraphim” was in 1999. In the full sense of the word, I’m already ready. But suddenly the direction of my path changed, and instead of Diveevo I found myself in the Holy Land - the most dear place for every Christian, where our Savior was born and lived, where He accomplished the feat of redeeming us from sin, from curse, from death. And I acutely felt that after the Promised Land, after Jerusalem - the eternal city on earth, the main place on it was my Motherland. And that this is not just the place “where I was born, came into the world from my father and mother, or where I “used to live”; but that spiritual place where I was born in spirit and from where I come in my life’s creativity. And if I consider Russia my homeland, then this means that I love, contemplate and think in Russian, sing and speak in Russian; that I believe in the spiritual powers of the Russian people and accept their historical destiny with my instinct and my will. His spirit is my spirit; his destiny is my destiny; his suffering is my grief; its flourishing is my joy" 391 . Therefore, Pushkin considered it necessary to categorically emphasize in a letter to P.Ya. Chaadaev (1836) that “I would never agree to change my homeland or to have a different history of our ancestors, which God sent us.” Metropolitan Anastasy (Gribanovsky) remarked on this matter: “Only a true patriot, selflessly loving his Motherland and his Church, taking a living and fruitful part in the construction of our history,” could write this way. From a rational point of view, Pushkin was imbued (like his younger contemporary Lermontov) with a strange love for the Fatherland, for his native ashes, for his father’s tombs. This is how one can love only by being aware of one’s pilgrimage on earth, walking along it in the way of those who labor and are burdened, who desperately strive for Heaven, who believe in the general resurrection of the dead. It is no coincidence that he realized all his earthly exiles (exiles) providentially and strove to transform every word and every moment of existence into “pure gold of poetry” (in particular, the famous Boldino autumn of 1830). It's no coincidence that B.C. Nepomniachtchi said: “Pushkin is Russia expressed in words” 393. “It seems to me,” the researcher writes, “what was embodied in the phenomenon of Pushkin is something unimaginably huge, perhaps some kind of truly super-historical power, given to my beautiful, my long-suffering Motherland as consolation, approval and instruction, a sign of a high lot placed on her brow” (article by B. S. Nepomnyashchiy “We propose to live... Pushkin. Russia. Highest values”). “This is something huge... superhistorical power” lies, in our opinion, in the fact that the spiritual needs of Russian society, the people in Russia at the end of the 18th and beginning of the 19th centuries put at the forefront the question of the spiritual formation of the individual and the nation. Contemplative monasticism is revived; smart work and eldership are being restored... It is no coincidence that in the Optina Desert they are looking for answers to the last questions of existence K.N. Leontyev, F.M. Dostoevsky, B.S. Soloviev, N.H. Strakhov, L.N. Tolstoy... But “Optina Pustyn,” writes the famous theologian, “was not the only spiritual center... There were also secret visits of the Spirit... the beginning of the last century in the destinies of the Russian Church was marked and marked by some kind of internal and mysterious shift (emphasis mine. - N.K.). This is evidenced by the prophetic image of St. Seraphim of Sarov, his feat, his joy, his teaching. The image of the newly revealed holiness remained unsolved for a long time. In this image, feat and joy, the burden of prayerful warfare and already heavenly lightness, the transfiguration of an already unearthly light are so wonderfully combined... his image and his whole life are already a manifestation of the Spirit... The true goal of our Christian life is to acquire the Holy Spirit of God. And there are no other goals, and there cannot be, everything else must be only a means...” Thus, spirituality is opposed to moralism with power. The meaning and fulfillment of Christian life is that the Spirit dwells in the human soul and transforms it “into the church of the Divine, into the bright palace of eternal joy” 394. And again: “The spirit is given, but it is also sought. It requires feat and acquisition” 395. This reasoning by G. Florovsky leads to many thoughts about the highest meaning of the life and work of the great national poet, who, in the words of I. A. Ilyin, showed “the most wonderful, holistic and victorious flowering of Russianness” 396, who understood that “it is not the imams of the city that abides here, but the one to come” (Heb. 13:14). It has been noted more than once that Pushkin’s artistic world is full of “strange connections.” The images of two great contemporaries: St. Seraphim of Sarov and Pushkin, are an example of the strangest, most strange rapprochement, but also the most logical. The content of these convergences requires special consideration. Here we note the main thing: “Reverend Seraphim is one of the most significant personalities in the history of Russian spirituality... As if in a light center, the characteristic idea of ​​Russian spirituality is condensed in him: the transformation of every creature through the power of a voluntary sacrifice of love and compassion. He is, as it were, a living image of the future restoration of all creation, the timing of which is hidden from us, but the guarantee of which is given to us through the resurrection and in the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Already in our present earthly life we ​​have access to a foretaste of the “resurrection of the dead” and the “life of the next century.” And according to the beautiful expression of Simeon the New Theologian, “the resurrection of the dead” is the “Holy Spirit”, so we can say that St. Seraphim... “brought a visible revelation about the Lord the Holy Spirit” 397. If the life of God’s messenger in the world, Seraphim, shows “what a saving significance a person who has purified himself and has come to God has for many people,” 398 then Pushkin’s life showed the saving significance of a person who has purified himself and gone to God. Moreover, this was shown by his death, which became for him a purification “from all the moral struggles that weighed on his soul... God left him two more days (45 hours) of life to atone for his sin and to prepare him worthy for eternity” 399. “It is difficult to find,” another researcher of the spiritual nature of man seems to pick up this idea, “another example of such a touching spiritual transformation in its everyday simplicity in the face of death” 400. He calls the death of the poet “the luminous beginning of a new life - Life” 401. And he considers “the fact that Pushkin could shine so brightly before fading away” to be evidence of the special spiritual value and earthly deeds of the poet, in whose person “literature... went beyond the boundaries of literature, remaining literature” 402, uniting together what Peter I had separated in Russia. That is why Pushkin is called “the embodiment of Russian national consciousness” 403, “the greatest Russian thinker of the 19th century” 404, “the living center of the Russian spirit, its history, its paths, its problems, its healthy forces and its diseased nodes” 405. In a word, “Pushkin is our everything” (Ap. Grigoriev). The poet died a Christian, and his death “confirms what he was unable and did not have time to say at his “writing desk” 406, what the Monk Seraphim “said” both in his life and in his dormition: “The Holy Faith in all its simplicity... found in the Orthodox Church, in its grace-filled sacraments, in its teaching - this is where the refuge is, where salvation is” 407. However, it is time to return to our last day in the Holy Land. I’m standing in the church of the Gornensky Monastery, to the right of the altar, closer to the exit. My eyes are filled with tears: “Thank You, Lord, forgive me, Lord, Glory to God for everything...” I raise my eyes: in front of me is an icon of St. Seraphim of Sarov with a hand blessing (on the way back): “And now, come to me, my joy...”. Summer 2003. The celebration of the 100th anniversary of the canonization of St. Seraphim of Sarov is an event of all-Russian and all-Christian significance. The dear name of “poor Seraphim” stirred up and called to itself, as it did 100 years ago, all of Orthodox Rus'. About 25 thousand pilgrims were expected from different parts of Russia and from abroad... Therefore, with the blessing of my spiritual father, already at the beginning of July I hurried to the Seraphim-Diveyevo monastery: to fall at the sacred tomb of the holy elder, lay down my sorrows to her, and ask for forgiveness. 11 years have passed since my first visit here. And how everything has changed and transformed here. Places associated with the memory of the elder, beloved by all Orthodox people, have regained their historical appearance. During the festivities, the anniversary celebrations were broadcast on television, which began on July 29 with a religious procession from Diveyevo to Sarov with the transfer of the relics of the saint. The next day - the consecration of the monastery church here in the name of St. Seraphim of Sarov. Divine Liturgy in the newly consecrated church, led by His Holiness Patriarch Alexy II of Moscow and All Rus'. Then a religious procession with the relics of the saint to the Seraphim-Diveevsky Monastery. All-night vigil here on July 31st. Finally, the central event of the celebrations is the Divine Liturgy at the Seraphim-Diveevo Monastery on August 1. A sea of ​​people. It is incredibly difficult not only to squeeze into the church, but also to leave it, even for those lucky ones who nevertheless found themselves in it by the grace of God. But even in mid-July, in anticipation of the anniversary celebrations, Diveevo was seething like a beehive: final work was underway on the restoration of the church in honor of the Kazan Icon of the Mother of God, on the restoration of the Mother of God ditch, which, however (at the height of the work), was allowed to be bypassed (it was compacted more tightly). The full impression of this marvelous trip is the subject of special reflection. I will focus on one episode in conclusion. As soon as I got off the train on the first day of my arrival in Diveevo, I met a group of pilgrims from Germany along with the Russian priest Alexy. Among those who arrived were my former student Natasha and her mother. Very nice, kind people, who, of course, don’t have much fun in Germany... All those who arrived are our Russian-German emigration of the last wave. Among them is the large 70-year-old “child” Joseph, who expresses his Sarovo-Diveyevo impressions very directly: - Yes, yes... gut? Sehr gut! Karaso! Very Karaso! – Do you know Pushkin, have you heard anything about Pushkin, about Boldin? - Puskin? – yes, yes, toze is very caraso. I don’t know Boldin. And Puskin is very caraso. I remembered the statement of Archimandrite Konstantin (Zaitsev): “Isn’t he (Pushkin. - N.K.) capable of being an exponent of our emigrant consciousness, since this consciousness is not strangled by the influence of alien elements? It is no coincidence that for a long time our Diaspora began to echo the name of Pushkin, forgetting under this banner its disagreements and differing feelings” 408. It is noteworthy that the future Bishop Anthony (in the world Alexey Pavlovich Khrapovitsky) at the age of seventeen fainted from the excess of feelings overwhelming him, listening to the famous speech about Dostoevsky’s Pushkin 409. I ran into old Josef in the church. There were tears in his huge round eyes. In response to my silent question, he put his hand to his heart: “Seraphim! Seraphim...” and sobbed like a child. For the umpteenth time it comes to mind: two great contemporaries did not meet (like two parallel lines) not because they could not meet in principle, not through Pushkin’s fault - after all, the paths of the poet and Moscow Metropolitan Philaret (Drozdov) crossed. The “two suns” of spiritual Russia meet every time in the hearts that love them, and at the first mention of one of them they merge into a single and inseparable whole. What awaits our Fatherland, in whose heart the names beat one after another: the Venerable Our Father Seraphim and the “sun of our poetry” Pushkin? The saint’s answer to this question is known to everyone: our Mother Russia will be saved and reborn if... if she brings worthy fruits of repentance. And the ardent love of our people for Pushkin, for poetry preaching Christian revival, can become a guarantee of this. Baturova T.K. "Seraphim" means "fiery" It has long been noted, and not by us, that the influence of a saint does not cease with the end of his earthly existence, but, on the contrary, intensifies and increases. Likewise, the influence of St. Seraphim on modern people is no less than what the pilgrims of the 19th century experienced. The veneration of the holy elder does not dry up over the years, which is why so many now go to marvelous Diveevo - the fourth inheritance of the Most Holy Theotokos, the reverend’s favorite creation. So I had the opportunity to visit this holy place: twice with my family, twice with pilgrimage groups. Each such trip is a miracle, a touch of another existence, which is probably why the feeling of joy is combined with excitement and mental tension. Trips to the saints of God are fundamentally different from worldly travel: you go to a holy place not willfully, but according to an inner call, feeling that you are expected there. The saint certainly takes his guests to him, receives them, takes care of them, and then sees them off on their way back. It is impossible to talk about these trips and meetings: there are very personal, intimate moments and experiences that an Orthodox person keeps deep in his heart as a great shrine. And yet, some points need to be told: I want to rejoice at the miracle once again, stand still in front of it and share this miracle with others, so that human hearts will be warmed, so that everyone will feel how close St. Seraphim is to us. Of the many pilgrimage experiences, I will choose only one moment. St. Seraphim of Sarov miraculously entered my life as a child and remained in it forever. Over the years, the feeling of closeness to the native saint intensified. A burning desire was born to go to the saint of God. It came true in the summer of 1997. The vacation began, coinciding with my husband’s vacation, and we, taking our six-year-old granddaughter with us, unanimously decided to go to Diveevo. No doubts, no hesitations, no arguments. Only joyful anticipation of the meeting. A long-distance family trip required additional expenses, and the necessary funds were miraculously provided to us. Back in May, I was offered an additional job at a pedagogical university, the payment was transferred exactly on the day of departure to Diveevo, half an hour before our departure. The money was small, but we received it very opportunely. When we returned from the trip three days later, we were surprised to discover that we had only spent this money. The first trip to a holy place is always special, it is deeply remembered, remembered in all its details. The road to Diveevo itself was amazing: through the ancient Russian cities of Vladimir and Murom, past protected forests... The feeling of joy and trembling excitement did not leave, happiness and miracle were so close. We stopped to rest in the forest and found ourselves in a clearing, flooded with sun and strewn with strawberries - you can’t pick them in an hour, and there’s no need, because we’re in a hurry to see the monk. And on a small hillock stood a strawberry bush with three huge berries - we had never seen anything like it. It was as if a living symbol of the Holy Trinity met us in a dense forest. And this is not the only gift, not the only joyful sign. We stopped to rest at a parking lot called “Fountain”. Simple, rough tables, wooden benches in the open air, two boys selling simple provisions for travelers, setting up a samovar, and carrying water from a source that gushes like a fountain from the ground - hence the name of this place. Here it is, the first source on our way. In Diveyevo we will meet a lot of them. On a pine tree in this improvised recreation area hangs an icon of St. Seraphim - the first image of him on our way. The icon is like a greeting, like a blessing. This means that Diveevo is close. The Diveyevo Monastery appears unexpectedly, almost miraculously. Pine forests are interspersed with endless fields - the space is amazing. Suddenly, majestic two domes and a bell tower appear on the horizon. They leave the impression of something unearthly, created not by human labor. It’s amazing to encounter such beauty in remote and remote places. Our little granddaughter, seeing the Diveyevo Monastery on the horizon, said with joyful amazement: “The bell tower goes to heaven!” We arrived in Diveevo in the evening. In the Trinity Cathedral, where the relics of St. Seraphim rest, an all-night service was going on, the church was full. And the sun was shining above the church, its powerful rays went towards the cathedral. The sun was not setting, but was “playing” joyfully. This is how it shines on Easter Day. And I remembered: “Seraphim” means “fiery.” And then there were three days in Diveevo: services with confession and communion, prayers at the saint’s shrine, unction (Peter’s Fast was in progress), holy springs, a ditch and a procession along it with a procession of the cross and alone... And all this was happiness given by the Monk Seraphim. The next time we visited Diveyevo was in the summer of 2000. The four of us set off: our youngest granddaughter had grown up. Traveling to a holy place with two children is not easy. You feel a special responsibility and you are no longer going for yourself. Such a trip becomes a service, especially when you remember how the Monk Seraphim loved children, joyfully calling them “treasure.” So he took care of our granddaughters. He called me over and greeted me. And the children’s hearts felt this love and responded: the girls steadfastly endured all the difficulties of the pilgrimage. But the saint’s special mercy appeared on the way back. Returning home through Vladimir, we decided to stop by the Assumption Cathedral - a majestic and beautiful church towering over the city. We drove up and stopped in front of closed doors: the church was being cleaned, only tourist groups were served. I had to leave with nothing. But it was at this time that a group of foreigners with a guide approached, and the attendant who opened the doors for them called out to us and invited us to enter. From the heat of a summer afternoon we found ourselves in the coolness of a dimly lit church. The beauty of the icons, the gold frames, the frescoes of St. Andrei Rublev, the shining iconostasis in the distance, the tombs of the saints of God. However, it was impossible to approach the shrines: the cleaning of the church was finishing, everything was blocked off. Suddenly, determination is born, and we turn to the working woman, say that we are coming from Diveevo, and ask for permission to pass. The woman, without saying a word, goes somewhere, and soon the rector of the cathedral appears, approaches us, smiles brightly: “Are you from the reverend? Come on in, come on in...” And we, embarrassed, confused, happy, follow the priest to the Vladimir shrines. A vibrant group of foreign tourists remains behind. The priest leads us to the holy relics, opens the shrine, allows us to venerate, then invites us to the main shrine - the miraculous copy of the Vladimir Icon of the Mother of God. Blessing us on the road, the priest smiles and in response to our gratitude he says the main thing: “It’s all the reverend...”. When we go on a journey, we hardly talk. There is quiet joy in our hearts. It becomes clear that the ardor of St. Seraphim can also manifest itself in this way: filling the soul with love and understanding. Outwardly, my third trip to Diveevo was completely different: the end of September 2002, a tour bus, unfamiliar people around, but most importantly - the rain, which began already on the road and did not stop for two days. When we arrived in Diveevo, the sky was hopelessly gloomy and the roads were washed out. And yet we stubbornly went to the holy springs and did not regret it: after swimming we immediately felt cheerful and joyful. But some bewilderment persisted: “What about St. Seraphim? After all, he’s fiery.” And the rain kept getting stronger. This time we walked along the ditch without clearing the road. However, no one left in search of a warm corner. Having walked along the canal with the procession of the cross and, according to the will of the saint, read the Archangel's greeting to the Mother of God 150 times, we held a prayer service in the rain. In the morning, still dark, having barely dried off in the hotel, under torrents of rain we went to an early service. Neither jackets nor umbrellas helped. But they walked cheerfully and amicably: the silhouettes of the Diveyevo cathedrals were visible from behind the wall of rain. After the service, a trip to the distant desert of the monk and again, in the rain, three times immersion in the holy spring. And immediately warm, joyful... On this day we went to the Sanaksarsky monastery to the relics of Theodore of Sanaksarsky and Theodore Ushakov - two holy saints of God, connected to each other not only by family ties (uncle and nephew), but above all by spiritual ties, who embodied the holiness and military glory of Russia. After a hospitable monastic overnight stay and liturgy, we set off on our way back home. The rain passed as if it had never happened. We left on a wonderful autumn day: the sun was shining, not a cloud in the blue sky. The bus rushed along the winding road. And suddenly a rainbow appeared in the clear sky, and what a rainbow! Not the usual rainbow-arc, but a large ball shimmering with all colors. And it seemed that the rainbow ball did not stand still, did not lag behind our bus, but moved after it. And this went on for quite a long time. All the pilgrims, who had become almost family to each other during the trip, looked without stopping at this miracle. And again I remembered: “Seraphim” means “fiery.” Abrashova Elena Aleksandrovna – applicant for the Department of Russian Classical Literature at Moscow State Regional University, teacher of Russian language and literature at Lyceum School No. 320 in Moscow. Averyanova Maria Alekseevna – applicant for the Department of Russian Classical Literature at Moscow State Regional University, teacher of literature at the School of Slavic Cultures in Podolsk, Moscow Region. Alekseeva Lyubov Fedorovna – Doctor of Philology, Professor, Head of the Department of Russian Literature of the 20th Century at Moscow State Regional University. Alexy (Averyanov), archpriest - rector of the church in honor of the Don Icon of the Mother of God in Podolsk, Moscow region. Anoshkina (Kasatkina) Vera Nikolaevna – Honored Scientist of the Russian Federation, Doctor of Philology, Professor, Head of the Department of Russian Classical Literature at Moscow State Regional University, Academician of the International Academy of Sciences of Pedagogical Education. Baturova Tatyana Konstantinovna – Doctor of Philology, Professor of the Department of Russian Classical Literature at Moscow State Regional University, Corresponding Member of the International Academy of Sciences of Pedagogical Education. Vasneva Antonina Mikhailovna – applicant for the Department of Russian Literature of the Moscow State Open Pedagogical University named after. M.A. Sholokhov. Gladilin Mikhail Sergeevich – senior researcher at the State Historical and Literary Museum-Reserve A.S. Pushkin "Zakharovo-Vyazemy", deputy director for scientific work of the Center for Children's Creativity "Pushkin School". Yuliya Aleksandrovna Evstigneeva is a postgraduate student at the Department of Russian Classical Literature at Moscow State Regional University. Evgenia Mikhailovna Zastrozhnova – Candidate of Philological Sciences, senior lecturer at the Department of Russian Literature at Yugra State University (Khanty-Mansiysk). Zverev Vitaly Prokhorovich – Doctor of Philology, Professor of the Department of Russian Classical Literature of the Moscow State Regional University, Head of the Department of General Humanities at the Moscow University of Consumer Cooperatives, Academician of the International Academy of Sciences of Pedagogical Education, member of the Union of Writers and the Union of Artists of Russia. Zelenina Yana Ernestovna – senior researcher at the Central Museum of Ancient Russian Culture and Art named after. Rev. Andrei Rublev. Ivanova Elena Mikhailovna – applicant for the Department of Russian Classical Literature at Moscow State Regional University. Kiseleva Irina Aleksandrovna – Candidate of Philological Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of Russian Classical Literature at Moscow State Regional University. Kopytseva Natalya Mikhailovna – Candidate of Philological Sciences, Professor of the Department of Moral and Aesthetic Education of Novgorod State University. Yaroslav the Wise. Korniliy (Apukhtin), hieromonk - priest of the Pokrovsko-Vasilievsky Monastery in Pavlovsky Posad, Moscow Region. Melnik Vladimir Ivanovich – Doctor of Philology, Professor of the Department of History and Theory of Literature and Journalism of Moscow State Social University, Corresponding Member of the Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Tatarstan, Full Member of the International Academy of Informatization, Member of the Writers' Union and the Union of Journalists of Russia. Motorin Alexander Vasilievich – Doctor of Philology, Professor, Head of the Department of Moral and Aesthetic Education of Novgorod State University named after. Yaroslav the Wise. Novikova Alla Anatolyevna – Doctor of Philology, Associate Professor of Oryol State University, Advisor to the Civil Service of the Oryol Regional Council of People's Deputies. Petrova Lyudmila Evgenievna – applicant for the Department of Russian Classical Literature at Moscow State Regional University. Repina Tatyana Sergeevna – graduate student of the Department of Russian Literature of the 20th Century, Moscow State Regional University. Ryabiy Mikhail Mikhailovich – Candidate of Philological Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of Russian Literature at Yugra State University (Khanty-Mansiysk). Yuri Ivanovich Sokhryakov – Doctor of Philology, Professor of the Department of Russian Classical Literature at Moscow State Regional University, Leading Researcher at the Institute of World Literature named after. A.M. Gorky of the Russian Academy of Sciences, academician of the International Slavic Academy, member of the Union of Writers of Russia. Fedoseeva Ekaterina Nikolaevna – candidate of philological sciences, senior lecturer of the literature department of the Michurinsk State Pedagogical Institute. Shmeleva Anna Vyacheslavovna – Candidate of Philological Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of Russian Classical Literature at Moscow State Regional University. Icon of the Mother of God “Tenderness” - Father Seraphim’s favorite image Appearance of the Mother of God to the novice Prokhor during his illness Father Seraphim going into the desert Father Seraphim feeding the bear Hieromonk of the Sarov Desert Father Seraphim Elder Seraphim going to the church Father Seraphim, hieromonk of the Sarov desert and desert dweller View of the elder Father Seraphim in the last years of his life Portrait of St. Seraphim. New Diveevo (USA) Lifetime portrait of the monk, located in the Church of the Archangel Michael of the monastery of St. Sergius of Radonezh Icon of St. Seraphim from the Moscow Church of the Tikhvin Icon of the Mother of God in Sushchev Venerable Seraphim of Sarov. Icon image. 1904 The collection, prepared by the Department of Russian Classical Literature of the Moscow State Regional University, is dedicated to the saint of the Russian land - St. Seraphim of Sarov and is a kind of link between two great dates - the 100th anniversary of the canonization and the 250th anniversary of the saint’s birth. The authors of the articles are clergy of churches near Moscow, specialists from the Institute of World Literature named after. A.M. Gorky Russian Academy of Sciences, art historians, museum workers, teachers of universities in Moscow, Veliky Novgorod, Orel, Michurinsk, Khanty-Mansiysk. They reveal the role of St. Seraphim in the development of Russian culture, represent the height of the spiritual feat of the great elder, and reveal the moral foundations of Russian classical literature. The collection presents the unity of religious and cultural issues, revealing the Orthodox origins of Russian classical literature. Quote from: The Legend of the Earthly Life of the Blessed Virgin Mary. M., 1904. P.203. During the revolution, "Kurskaya-Korennaya" was taken by emigrants to the USA and is now in New York. Metropolitan Veniamin (Fedchenkov). World lamp. Venerable Seraphim of Sarov. M., 2003. S. 104, 106. Chronicle of the Seraphim-Diveevsky Monastery. Reprint, reprint. M., 2000. P. 328. Roman, hieromonk. Heeding God's command. Ed. 3rd. Minsk, 2000. P. 306. Sventsitsky V., archpriest. Venerable Seraphim. Diveevo, 1996. pp. 3–4. Ilyin V.N. Burning fire // Seraphim of Sarov. A heartfelt word about the great ascetic of the Russian Land. M., 2002. P. 142. Quote by: Nilus S.L. Great in small // Nilus S.L. Full collection cit.: In 6 vols. M., 1999. T. 1. P. 277. Seraphim Vyritsky, Rev. “It was from me.” M., 2001. P. 12. Quote by: Sventsitsky V., archpriest. Venerable Seraphim. P. 90. Sergius Bulgakov, archpriest. Coal flaming after a hundred years // Seraphim of Sarov. A heartfelt word about the great ascetic of the Russian Land. P. 144. Rozanov V.V. Through quiet abodes // Seraphim of Sarov. A heartfelt word about the great ascetic of the Russian Land. P. 97. Orthodox family reading. M., 2000. P. 340. Seraphim (Chichagov), archimandrite. Chronicle of the Seraphim-Diveevsky Monastery. Reprint, reprint. M., 2002. P. 195. Berdyaev N.A. Philosophy of creativity, culture and art: In 2 vols. M., 1994. T. 1. P. 172, 174. Kasatkina V.N. Christian foundations of Russian romanticism // Literature and Christianity. Belgorod, 2000. pp. 5–11. Kraval L.A. The Orthodox world in Pushkin’s drawings // Russian Revival: Independent Russian Orthodox National Journal. New York – Moscow – Paris, 1999. No. 1 (74) Quote by: John (Krestyankin), archimandrite. Sermons: In 2 volumes. St. Petersburg-M., 1994. T. 2. P. 25. Telescope: Journal of modern education, published by N. Nadezhdin. M., 1833. Part 13. No. 2. P. 187. Telescope. 1834. Part 19. No. 4. P. 233. Telescope. 1835. Part 25. No. 1. P. 152–153. Tyutchev F.I. Full collection op. and letters: In 6 vols. M., 2003. T. 2. P. 238. See: Nilus S.L. Great in small // Nilus S.L. Full collection cit.: In 6 vols. M., 1999. T. 1. P. 188–201. Yazykov N.M. Poems and poems. L., 1988. P. 300. Quote by: Ilyin V.N. Venerable Seraphim of Sarov. M., b/g. P. 33. Villager E. “And Seraphim?” // Seraphim of Sarov. A heartfelt word about the great ascetic of the Russian Land. P. 117. 0 portraits are mentioned, in particular, in the two most complete biographies of the saint: Elagin N.V. The life of Elder Seraphim, Sarov monastery hieromonk, desert dweller and recluse: with the application of his instructions and cell prayer rules. M., 2003. S. 246–247; Denisov L.I. The life of our venerable and God-bearing father Seraphim, the Wonderworker of Sarov. M., 1998. pp. 17–21. The earliest known copy of Serebryakov's portrait is dated in the inscription on the back to 1829, i.e. executed several years before the death of the elder (kept in the Trinity Seraphim-Diveevsky Monastery). According to the remark of L.I. Denisov, at the beginning of the 20th century there was no longer a portrait by D. Evstafiev in the Sarov desert (Denisov L.I. Op. op. p. 18); obviously, that is why it was not in demand by icon painters when developing the canon of the image of the saint. With the exception of hagiographical stamps and small pilgrimage icons made by Diveyevo, there are practically no icon-paintings with the image of a saint in a hood walking into the hermitage. In private collections there is a fragment of a similar image and a photocopy; in both cases, their existence during the life of the elder is confirmed by later inscriptions. [Gury.] A brief outline of the life of the elder of the Sarov hermitage, schema-monk and hermit Mark. M., 1839. Denisov L.I. Decree. op. P. 18. One of the copies of the portrait by the Diveyevo sisters of the late 19th century is on a pillar in the Trinity Cathedral of the Seraphim-Diveyevo Monastery. Diveyevo Orthodox Church Calendar. 2001. Ed. Holy Trinity Seraphim-Diveevsky Monastery, [2000]. pp. 45, 209. Strizhev A.N. About the images of Elder Seraphim // God's Pleasant Seraphim. Ed. Spaso-Preobrazhensky Valaam Monastery, 1993. T. 1. P. 314–315. Currently, the Seraphim-Diveevo Monastery houses an exact copy of the portrait of 1831, executed at the beginning of the 20th century, with the corresponding inscription on the back. Lithographs depicting St. Seraphim of Sarov in the collection of the prints department of the Russian National Library were identified by N.I. Rudakova, in the art publications department of the RSL - M.E. Ermakova and O.V. Meshshishina. We express our deep gratitude to them for the opportunity to study the prints and valuable advice. Diveyevo Orthodox Church Calendar. 2001. P. 44, 188. Nizhny Novgorod Diocesan Gazette. The part is unofficial. M., 1887. No. 8. P. 347. For more information, see: RGIA. F.797. Op. 28. Storage unit 20; F.796. Op.139. Storage unit 440; F.789. Op.2. Storage unit 70. Priest Georgy Pavlovich drew attention to these circumstances after analyzing the service records of the sisters of the monastery. Denisov L.I. Decree. op. pp. 18, 21. If the iconography of these works coincides with the description of L.I. Denisov, they have the same caption about the image of the elder “in the last years of his life” (on the picturesque portrait the inscription is later). However, the portrait by D. Evstafiev was created when St. Seraphim was about fifty years old, that is, at the very beginning of the 19th century. Serafimovsky Diveyevo Orthodox calendar collection. 2003. Ed. Holy Trinity Seraphim-Diveevsky Monastery, [2002]. P. 154. Tales of the exploits and events in the life of Elder Seraphim, hieromonk, hermit and recluse of the Sarov Hermitage, with the addition of an outline of the life of the founder of the Diveyevo convent Agathia Simeonovna Melgunova / Transmitted by Hieromonk Joasaph. St. Petersburg, 1849. The edition contains only one lithograph by P.F. Borel, based on his watercolors. The inscription is reproduced in the author's spelling. Diveyevo legends / Comp. A.N. Strizhev. M., 1996. P. 14. The list was prepared on the basis of prints from the collections of the Russian State Library, the Russian National Library, the State Historical Museum, the Russian State Historical Archive, the Central Accusatory of the MDA, the TSDM and private individuals. The main goal was to present a chronological list of works that came out of the workshop, and not a complete catalog of surviving copies, so specific indications of size and storage location are omitted. The feat of Elder Seraphim / Comp. A.N. Strizhev. M., 1999. S. 45–46, 76. Chronicle of the Seraphim-Diveyevo Monastery, compiled by Metropolitan Seraphim (Chichagov). Reprint reprint Moscow Mother of God Nativity Convent. M., 1996. P. 354. RGALI. F.7. Op.2. Storage unit 330. L.1. RGALI. F.7. Op.2. Storage unit 330. L.1 vol. Gogol N.V. Collection cit.: In 9 volumes. M., 1994. T. 6: Letters. P. 48. Smirnova (nee Rosset) L.O. Notes. M., 1999. P. 21. See: Catalog of the antiquarian library of bookseller E.Ya. Fedorov, acquired after former minister D.P. Troshchinsky. Kiev, 1874. Read more about the spiritual education of young N.V. Gogol, see: Motorip A.B. Gogol's spiritual contradictions. Veliky Novgorod: NovGU Publishing House, 1999. See: John (Kologrivov), hieromonk. Essays on the history of Russian holiness. Brussels: Life with God, 1961. P. 310. Right there. P. 344. A selection of judgments of Saint Tikhon of Zadonsk about spiritual joy, made according to the sixth edition of his works (St. Petersburg, 1899), is given in the book: John (Maslov), schema-archimandrite. Symphony based on the works of St. Tikhon of Zadonsk. M., 2000. pp. 783–787. John (Kologrivov), hieromonk. Essays on the history of Russian holiness. P. 311. Gogol N.V. Full collection cit.: In 14 vols. [M.-L.], 1937–1952. T. 12. P. 468. Kraval L.A. Pushkin and Saint Seraphim // Christian culture: Pushkin era. St. Petersburg, 1996. Issue. 10. pp. 26–30. Nilus S. Great in small. Ed. 3rd, rev. and additional Sergiev II Regional Garden, 1911. pp. 141–151. See: Afanasyev V. Orthodox philosopher: The spiritual quest of Ivan Vasilyevich Kireevsky // Church and education. Perm, 2000. Issue. 6. P. 80. See notes by V.A. Voropaev and I.A. Vinogradov in the book: Gogol N.V. Collection cit.: In 9 volumes. M.: Russian Book, 1994. T. 8. P. 825–828; T. 6. pp. 396–397. [Seraphim of Sarov]. Holy Venerable Seraphim of Sarov, Wonderworker. Odessa, 1903. P. 22. Gogol N.V. Full collection op. T. 12. P. 233. John (Kologrivov), hieromonk. Essays on the history of Russian holiness. P. 393. Nilus S. Great in small. P. 204. Right there. P. 207. Let us compare the Gospel description of the Transfiguration of the Lord: “And He was transfigured before them: and His face shone like the sun, and His robe was as white as light” (Matthew 17:2). Pushkin A.S. Collection cit.: In 10 volumes. M., 1974–1978. T. 6. P. 97. Gogol N.V. Full collection op. T. 13. P. 293. Nilus S. Great in small. P. 208. See: Mashkovtsev N.G. Gogol among artists: Essays. M., 1955. P.152. Gogol N.V. Full collection op. T. 12. P. 279. See, for example: Averintsev S.S. Bakhtin, laughter and Christian culture // M.M. Bakhtin as a philosopher. M., 1992. pp. 10–11. Gogol N.V. Collection cit.: In 9 volumes. M., 1994. T. 6. P. 286. This type of laughter is only distantly reflected in the late Dostoevsky, who relied specifically on Gogol’s experience. On the peculiarities of Dostoevsky’s spiritual understanding of laughter, see: A.E. Kunilsky. The problem of “laughter and Christianity” in Dostoevsky’s novel “The Brothers Karamazov” // Gospel text in Russian literature of the 18th-19th centuries: Quote, reminiscence, motive, plot, genre. Petrozavodsk, 1994. pp. 192–200. Nilus S. Great in small. Notes of an Orthodox Christian. Publication of the Holy Trinity Lavra of St. Sergius, 1992. P. 109. Goncharov I.A. Collection cit.: In 8 volumes. M., 1953. T. 4. P. 115. Further references to this publication are given in the text indicating the volume and page. Chronicler of the Goncharov family. Ulyanovsk, 1996. P. 307. Literary heritage. M., 2000. T. 102. pp. 619–620 Chronicler of the Goncharov family. P. 356. Nilus S. Great in small. Notes of an Orthodox Christian. P. 113. Literary heritage. T. 102. P. 499. City of Simbirsk wonderful praise and intercession. Ulyanovsk, 2000. P. 11. Bulletin of Europe. 1908. T. XII. P. 423. See: Literary heritage. T. 102. P. 634. Collection of the Russian Public Library. T. 11. Materials and research. Pg., 1924. Issue. 1. P. 155. Literary heritage. T. 102. P. 486. Koni A.F. Memories of writers. M., 1989. P. 77. Leskov N.S. Collection cit.: In 12 volumes. M., 1989. T. 7. P. 25. Further references to this publication are given in the text indicating the volume and page. McLean H. Nikolai Leskov. The Man and His Art. Harvard University. Press. Cambridge; Massachusetts; London, 1977. P. 3 Fedotov G.P. Saints of ancient Rus'. Paris, 1989. P. 236. Leskov N.S. Count L.N. Tolstoy and F.M. Dostoevsky as heresiarchs (Religion of fear and religion of love) // News and Exchange newspaper. 1883. No. 1. Lantz K.A. Nikolai Leskov. Boston Twayne Rubishers. A Division of I.K. Hall & Co, 1979. P. 124. Pulkhritudova E.M. Creativity N.S. Leskova and Russian mass fiction // In the world of Leskova. M., 1983. P. 179. Holidays of the Orthodox Church. M., 1905. P. 50. Dickens Ch. Collected. cit.: In 30 volumes. M., 1958. T. 12. P. 70. Lossky V.N. Essay on the mystical theology of the Eastern Church. M., 1991. pp. 154–155. Quote by: Denisov L.I. The life, exploits, miracles, spiritual instructions and discovery of the holy relics of St. Seraphim, the Wonderworker of Sarov. M., 1904. P. 420. Shmelev I.S. Collection Op.: In 5 volumes (Vol. 6, 7, 8 additional). M., 1999. T. 6. P. 282. Subsequent footnotes are given for this edition, indicating the volume and page after the quotation. Reverend Father Seraphim: A collection of stories, legends, memories of our Reverend and God-Bearing Father Seraphim of Sarov the Wonderworker and the Seraphim-Diveyevo Monastery. Diveevo, 2003. P. 7. Russian pilgrim. 2004. No. 29. P. 4. Ilyin I. A. Collection. cit.: Correspondence of two Ivans (1935–1946). M., 2000. P.12. Ilyin I.A. Collection cit.: Correspondence of two Ivans (1927–1934). M., 2000. P.468. I.S. Shmelev and O.A. Bredius-Subbotina: Novel in letters: In 2 vols. M., 2003. T. 1.S. 61. Lyubomudrov A.M. Spiritual realism in Russian literature abroad: B.K. Zaitsev, I.S. Shmelev. St. Petersburg, 2003. P. 173. Strizhev A. N. Decoration of the Russian Land // Seraphim of Sarov. A heartfelt word about the great ascetic of the Russian Land. M., 2002. P. 3. See: Ilyin I.A. Collection Op.: In 10 volumes. T.2. Book 1. Krylov A.K., Krylova O.Yu. Results of work on copying and cartogramming frescoes of the 16th century of the Church of the Holy Trinity in the village of Bolshie Vyazemy // Trinity Readings 1997: Collection of scientific research based on conference materials. Bolshie Vyazemy, 1998. P. 24. Dominyak E.I. Painting of the Church of the Transfiguration // The Golitsyn family in the history of Russia: Materials of the Golitsyn readings on March 26, 1994. Bolshie Vyazemy, 1995. P. 124. Kuzmina I.B. The idea of ​​the “Kingdom of God” in the ideology of Boris Godunov // Trinity Readings 1999: Collection of materials from the scientific conference on September 23, 1999. Bolshie Vyazemy, 1999. P. 87. Krylov A.K. Autographs-graffiti of the 17th century in the Trinity Church in the village of Vyazemy // Trinity Readings 1997: Collection of scientific research based on conference materials. Bolshie Vyazemy, 1998. pp. 50–65. Girivenko A.N. Shevyrev as a bibliophile // Hosts and guests of the Vyazemy estate: Materials of the Golitsyn readings on January 24–25, 1998. Bolshie Vyazemy, 1998. P. 303. Dominyak E.I. V.V. Suslov is the creator of the first restoration project for the Church of the Transfiguration in the village. Bolshie Vyazemy // Hosts and guests of the Vyazemy estate: Materials of the Golitsyn readings on January 21–22, 1995. Bolshie Vyazemy, 1995. pp. 108–112. Letters from the Royal Family from captivity / Ed. HER. Alferyeva. Jordanville: Holy Trinity Monastery, . P. 217. See: Nepomnyashchy B.C. “Let the descendants of the Orthodox know...” // Russian Renaissance. 1999. No. 1. Scientists from St. Petersburg, who studied the mounds of the Slavs on the territory of their early settlements (Staraya Ladoga, etc.), discovered the burial of the first Varangian, Prince Rurik, buried in a Christian manner with the name George (ORT, November 2003, program “Seekers”). Perhaps this is why many princes took the name George in baptism (for example, Yaroslav the Wise) and the image of George the spear-bearer, a snake fighter, became the emblem of Moscow and the Moscow state. Dunaev M.M. Orthodox foundations of Russian literature of the 19th century: Dis. in the form of a scientific report... Dr. Philol. Sci. M., 1999. S. 3, 7. John (Snychev), metropolitan. Be faithful until death. Orthodoxy and modernity. M., 1993. P. 47. Dostoevsky F.M. Complete collection cit.: In 30 vol. L., 1986. T. 27. P. 64. See: Arapova Alexandra. Natalia Nikolaevna Pushkina-Lanskaya. To the family chronicle of the wife of A.S. Pushkin. M., 1994. pp. 47–48. Spelling and punctuation are preserved in the text. Dunaev M.M. Orthodoxy and Russian literature: In 6 hours. Moscow, 1996. Part I. P. 238. Pushkin A.S. Full collection cit.: In 16 vols. M.-L., 1937–1949. T. XI. P. 43. Panchenko A.M. Russian culture on the eve of Peter's reforms. L., 1984. P. 156. Pushkin A.S. Full collection op. T.VII. P. 54. Letters from the Royal Family from captivity. pp. 64–65. Chekhov A.P. Student // Chekhov A.P. Bishop. Selected stories. N. Novgorod, 1998. P. 24. Pushkin A.S. Full collection op. T.VII. P. 10. Quote from: Letters from the Royal Family from captivity. P. 462. Here and below, poetic texts are quoted from the following sources: Pushkin A.S. Collection cit.: In 10 volumes. M., 1997; Baratynsky E.A. Full collection poems / Ed. prepared V.M. Sergeev. L., 1989; Vyazemsky P.A. Poems / Intro. Art. L.Ya. Ginsburg; comp., prepared text and notes K.A. Kumpan. L., 1986. Grekhnev V.A. Boldino lyrics by A.S. Pushkin. 1830 Gorky, 1980. P. 81. Frank S.L. Pushkin’s religiosity // A.S. Pushkin: Pro et contra. St. Petersburg, 2000. T. II. P. 101. The poetic dialogue between Metropolitan Philaret and Pushkin attracted the attention of many researchers. This topic received the most complete coverage in the essay by Metropolitan Anastasy “Pushkin in his attitude to religion and the Orthodox Church,” published on the centenary of the poet’s death. Among the works of the last decade: Mikhailova N.I. Pushkin and the Metropolitan // Russian asceticism. M., 1996. S. 222–227; John Malinin. On the literary correspondence between Metropolitan Philaret and Pushkin // Pushkin era and Christian culture. St. Petersburg, 1994. Issue. 6. pp. 37–42; Dobrovolskaya E.B. “Divine verb...” // Ibid. pp. 16–28; Ilyina T.Yu. Dialogue between the saint and the poet (A.S. Pushkin and Metropolitan Philaret of Moscow) // School. 1999. No. 2. P. 17–23. Frank S.L. Pushkin's religiosity. P. 103. Quote from: Pushkin and his time. M., 1997. P. 291. A collection of opinions and reviews of Philaret, Metropolitan of Moscow and Kolomna, on educational and church-state issues. St. Petersburg, 1885. T. 1.S. 408. From a letter from P.Ya. Chaadaev to Pushkin from March-April 1829. Quote by: Pozov A. Metaphysics of Pushkin. M., 1998. P. 235. Ilyin I.A. Singing heart. Book of Quiet Contemplations // Ilyin I.A. The path to obviousness. M., 1998. P. 596. Vyazemsky P.A. From "Notebooks". 1828 // Pushkin in the memoirs of his contemporaries. St. Petersburg, 1998. P. 147. Ilyin I A. Singing heart. P. 622. Aksakov I.S. Biography of Fyodor Ivanovich Tyutchev. M., 1886. Reprint, reprint. M., 1997. P. 48. U I.S. Aksakov, as usual in the 19th century, the title of the poem was printed without an exclamation mark. Nekrasov N.A. Russian minor poets // Nekrasov N.A. Full collection op. and letters: In 30 volumes. Essays. M., 1980. T. 9. P. 215. Library for reading. 1854. T. 127. Dep. 6. pp. 3–4. Bryusov V.Ya. F.I. Tyutchev // Tyutchev F.I. Full collection op. / Ed. P.V. Bykova. St. Petersburg, [1913]. P. XLII. Derman A. // Testaments. 1912. No. 9. P. 197. Word of mouth. 1833. March 16. No. 32. P. 125. Merezhkovsky D. S. Two secrets of Russian poetry. Nekrasov and Tyutchev. Pg., 1915. P. 13. See: Bryusov V.Ya. Solution or error? // Russian thought. 1914. No. Z. pp. 17–18. Balmont K.D. Elementary words about symbolic poetry. // Mountain peaks: Sat. articles. M., 1904. pp. 88–89. Ivanov Vyach. By the stars. St. Petersburg, 1909, pp. 37–38. Bryusov V.Ya. The meaning of modern poetry // Bryusov V.Ya. Favorite cit.: In 2 vols. M., 1955. T. 2. P. 325. Bely A. The magic of words // Symbolism. M., 1910. P. 429. Tolstoy L.N. Full collection cit.: In 90 volumes. M., 1928–1958. T. 42. pp. 107–108 Hereinafter cited. by: Tyutchev F.I. Full collection op. and letters: In 6 vols. M., 2002–2003. T. 1–2. See poems: “When he died, he doubted...”, “The Banner and the Word”, “A.F. Hilferding”, “To the one who with faith and love...”, “Now you have no time for poetry...”, “May 11, 1869”. Aksakov I.O. Biography of Fyodor Ivanovich Tyutchev. M., 1886. Reprint. reprint M., 1997. P. 10. Tyutcheva A.F. Memories. M., 2000. P. 164. Bukhshtab B.Ya. Russian poets. Tyutchev, Fet, Kozma Prutkov, Dobrolyubov. L., 1970. P. 36. Pigarev K.V. F.I. Tyutchev and his time. M., 1978. P. 27. Aksakov I.S. Biography of Fyodor Ivanovich Tyutchev. P. 104. Tyutchev F.I. Full collection op. and letters: In 6 vols. M., 2002. T. 1. P. 139. Further this edition is cited indicating the volume and page in the text. Trubetskoy E.H. Three essays about the Russian icon. M., 1991. P. 48. Pigarev K.V. F.I. Tyutchev and his time. P. 269. See: Suzi V.N. Mother of God motifs in Tyutchev’s landscape lyrics // Gospel text in Russian literature of the 18th-20th centuries: quotation, reminiscence, motive, plot, genre. Petrozavodsk, 1991. Issue. 3. pp. 170–179. Lermontov M.Yu. Collection cit.: In 4 vols. M., 1957. T. 1. P. 16. Further references to this publication are given indicating the volume and page in the text of the article. Augustine Aurelius. Confession. M., 1996. P. 98. Yu. Felsen. From “Letters about Lermontov” // Fatalist. M., 1999. P.63. A.B. Motorin writes that at the end of the confession Mtsyri “humbles himself and, therefore, is spiritually healed, and this is the guarantee of physical healing from the disease. Lermontov removed the original title “Beri,” which directly indicated that the hero survived and took monastic vows, but left... a hint: Mtsyri’s confession, according to Christian laws, could only be made public by himself.” A.B. Motorin refers to the observation of T. Gorskaya, as well as to the well-known evidence of A.P. Shan-Girey and A.A. Khastatova, according to which Lermontov in Georgia heard the story of his life from a monk. See: Motorin A.B. Spiritual directions in Russian literature of the first half of the 19th century. Veliky Novgorod, 1998. P. 137. Meyendorff I., archpriest. Introduction to Patristic Theology. Klin, 2001. P. 139. Quote by: Polezhaev A. Works. L., 1960. P. 17. Rosen A.E. Biographical sketch of A.I. Odoevsky // Russian literature of the 19th century. 1800–1830s. Reader of memoirs, epistolary materials and literary critical articles / Under. ed. V.N. Anoshkina. M., 2000. P. 180. Kedrov K.A. Religious motives // Lermontov Encyclopedia. M., 1981. P. 365. Udodov B.T. Psychologism in the works of M.Yu. Lermontov // Questions of poetics of literature and folklore. Voronezh, 1976. P. 119. The Ladder, or Spiritual Tablets of our Venerable Father John, Abbot of Mount Sinai. Krasnodar, 1999. P. 5. Bobkov K.V., Shevtsov V.V. Symbol and spiritual experience of Orthodoxy. M., 1996. P. 48. Quote by: Priyma F.Ya. Echoes of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” in the poetry of M.Yu. Lermontov // Priyma F.Ya. “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” in the historical and literary process of the first third of the 19th century. L., 1980. P. 98. Muravyov A.N. Travel to Holy Places in 1830 // Travel notes of Russian writers. M., 1995. P. 212. Chronograph edition 1512 // PSRL. St. Petersburg T. 22. Part 1. P. 268. Quoted from: Plyukhanova M.B. Subjects and symbols of the Moscow Kingdom. St. Petersburg, 1995. P.110. Muravyov A.L. Travel to the Holy Places in 1830. P. 212. Odoevsky A.I. Full collection op. L., 1958. P. 178. Muravyov A.N. Georgia and Armenia. St. Petersburg, 1848. P. 36. Quote by: Ivanov. Fedotov. Kramskoy. St. Petersburg, 1995. P. 74. Buzzer V.N. Eschatology Al. Ivanova // Scientific notes of the Department of History of European Cultures. Kharkov, 1929. P. 43. Quote by: Ivanov. Fedotov. Kramskoy. P. 78. Florovsky G. Ways of Russian theology. P. 268. Quote by: Macarius (Ovsiyuk), Metropolitan. Eschatology of Saint Gregory of Nyssa. M., 1999. P. 87. Quote by: Cyprian (Kern), archimandrite. The Golden Age of Patristic Writing. P. 35. Quote by: Macarius (Ovsiyuk), Metropolitan. Decree. op. P. 618. Ilyin I.A Lonely artist. M., 1993. P. 115. RGALI. F. 2538. Op. 16. Unit hr. 37. Russian aesthetics and criticism of the 40–50s of the 19th century. M., 1982. P. 284. Gogol N.V. Collection cit.: In 9 volumes. M., 1994. T. 5. P. 150. The letter “What, finally, is the essence of Russian poetry and what is its peculiarity” precedes the letter “Bright Sunday”, which ends the book, which, I think, is not accidental. Gogol N.V. Collection cit.: In 9 vols. T. 6. P.184. “Reflections on the Divine Liturgy” is one of Gogol’s most frequently republished works in recent times. Quote by: Nikon (Murtazov), Herodeacon. The power of the cross: An earthly story. M., 2003. S. 85, 89. Poem “To the Virgin Soother of Sorrows” cit. by: Glinka F.N. Experiences in Sacred Poetry. St. Petersburg, 1826, pp. 126–128. Complete Orthodox Theological Encyclopedic Dictionary: In 2 volumes. Reprint. reprint M., 1992. T. II. Stlb. 1555. Biblical encyclopedia. Reprint reprint M., 1990. P. 456. With all the scientific and theological rigor, modern encyclopedic publications, noting the scant biblical data about the Blessed Virgin, are inclined to a more detailed interpretation of the image of the Mother of God: “An extremely short description of the life of Mary and her relationship with our Lord leaves many empty pages in the gospel narratives. However, we cannot add anything so as not to violate the historicity of the biblical records; which means that we must be content with the little that is written about her life. But we can rightfully note very important traits of her character: humility, submission, love and devotion to Jesus. She was the mother of the Son of God, and we can only say about her in the words of Elizabeth: “Blessed are you among women” (New Bible Dictionary. Part 1: Biblical characters / Translated from English. St. Petersburg, 1999. pp. 205–206). RGALI. F. 141. Op. 1. Unit hr. 51. L. 11. Glinka F.N. Essays. T. 1: Spiritual poems. M., 1869. P. 366. GATO. F. 103. Op. 1. Unit hr. 983. L. 14–14 vol. RGALI. F. 141. Op. 1. Unit hr. 41. L. 10 vol.–11 vol. Holy Mother of God. Miracle-working icons and prayers for everyday needs / Comp. I. Pankeev. M., 2001. P. 142. GATO. F. 103. Op. 1. Unit hr. 998. L. 17. Life of the Blessed Virgin Mary according to the books of the Chetya-Mineaia / Comp. Avdotya Glinka. M., 2002. P. 7–8. Quote from: Villager E. Mother of God. Description of Her earthly life and miraculous icons: In 2 books. M., 2002. Book. 1. P. 133. GATO. F. 103. Op. 1. Unit hr. 998. L. 17, 18 vol., 18. (The numbering of sheets in the archival file is incorrect: the order corresponding to the logic and real meaning of the text is violated.) Quote from: Mysterious Drop. The legend about the prudent thief and its reflection in the images of the icons of the Most Holy Theotokos: the Healer and the Mammal Mother / Edition of the Athos Russian Elias Skete. M., 1899. P. 5–6. One of our most enlightened compatriots, who studied at the University of Göttingen, saw and read this legend from the owner of the house in which he lived. The legend was in German; the pious old woman took care of it like a shrine. Note by F.N. Glinka. Glinka F.N. The Mysterious Drop: In 2 volumes. Berlin, 1861. T. 1. P. III-V. Right there. T. 2. P. 433, 433–434. Mysterious Drop. T. 2. pp. 434–436. Hereinafter the text of the poem “The Mysterious Drop” cit. by: Glinka F.N. The Mysterious Drop: In 2 vols. Berlin, 1861; footnotes are given after quotations, with volume and page numbers in parentheses. The Book of the Prophet Isaiah says: “Then Isaiah said: Listen, O house of David! Is it not enough for you to make trouble for people that you want to make it difficult for my God? / So the Lord Himself will give you a sign: behold, a virgin will be with child and give birth to a Son, and they will call His name Immanuel. / He will eat milk and honey until he understands to reject the bad and choose the good” (Is. 7:13-15). Psalm 44 says, “All the glory of the King’s daughter is within; her clothes are embroidered with gold. / In speckled clothes she is led to the King; after her the virgins, her friends, are led to You. / They are brought with joy and rejoicing, they enter the palace of the King” (Ps. 45:14-16). In patristic literature there is no confident and unambiguous interpretation of Psalm 44 (“one of the most beautiful, but also the most difficult in the Psalter,” in the words of X. Horde) and especially these verses. Saint John Chrysostom in his conversations, for example, noted: “Since he (the prophet David - V.Z.) mentioned the face, clothes and beauty, so that one of the rude people would not imagine something sensual, he further says: all the glory of the princess’s daughter is within (v. 14). Penetrate, he says, into her heart, know the beauty of her soul; I tell you about them; Although I mention clothes, beauty, gold, fringes, jewelry and other similar things, the speech is about the heart, the teaching is about the soul, the word is about virtue, about inner glory. Just as a body clothed with gold is beautiful, so is a soul clothed with virtue. Do you see the decorated clothes, do you see the golden vestment - the color of virginity? This is the clothing of the Church" (St. John Chrysostom. Complete collection of creations: In 12 vols. M„ 1995. Vol. 5, book 1. pp. 205–206). “The King’s Daughter,” according to the interpretation of St. John Chrysostom, is the Church. A similar commentary on the 14th verse is given by the Greek philosopher and monk Euthymius Zigaben: “Lest anyone should think that the above-mentioned clothes and the beauty of the church are sensual; therefore, here he raises the mind of the listeners to the mental, and says that all the beauty, all the splendor and attire of the church are mental and spiritual, and therefore are in the soul, and not in the body: because spiritual beauty is pleasing and precious to God, and not physical, and a robe made of virtues, and not of clothes, is pleasing” (Euphemius). Zigaben, Explanatory Psalter, M., 2000, pp. 359–360). The interpretation of Psalm 44 in the Russian Orthodox Church has its own tradition, which, in all likelihood, was followed by F.N. Thus, in the “Guide to Understanding the Psalter” we read: “The idea that the synagogue will occupy a special, distinctive place in the messianic kingdom and that the pagans will only gain entry through it (v. 13) is often found among the prophets. Our Lady Mary, the Beautiful Flower of the synagogue, stands closest to the glorified Savior (as Mother) of all the bridal souls; she has the greatest participation in His God-human power (at the right hand)” (A guide to understanding the Psalter / Compiled by X. Orda. M.; St. Petersburg, 2000. pp. 146–147, footnote). Glinka F.N. Essays. T. 1: Spiritual poems. M., 1869. P. 478. Saint-Simon A.K. New Christianity // Saint-Simon A.K. Favorite cit.: In 2 vols. M.-L., 1948. T. 2. P. 364–435. Saint-Simon A.K. Literary, philosophical, industrial reasoning // Ibid. P. 298. Public charity of our days // Moskovskie Vedomosti. 1847. No. 20. pp. 152–158. A few words in addition to the article “Public charity of our days” // Ibid. No. 21. pp. 160–161. Shevyrev S.P. The last poor on earth, or a humane utopia // Ibid. No. 22. P. 170. Contemporary. 1847. T. 6. No. 12. Dep. criticism and bibliography. pp. 135–160. Modern notes // Contemporary. 1847. T. 2. No. 3. P. 52. Morozov P. The struggle between Christianity and idolatry, or the struggle between truth and lies // Moskvitian. 1846. Part 3. No. 5. P. 82. Contemporary. 1849. T. 15. No. 5. Dep. criticism and bibliography. pp.54–55. Muscovite. 1849. Part 2. No. 5–8. Dept. criticism and bibliography. pp.81–82. Modern notes // Contemporary. 1847. T. 1. No. 1. Dept. mixtures. P. 52. Duke F.I. Research on crazy people (report on five years of medical practice at the Hospital of All Who Sorrow) // Otechestvennye zapiski. 1846. T. 49. No. 11. Dep. science. P. 47. To be fair, another reason for this phenomenon should be noted, named by the author of the article as the availability of places for men and women from grades I to III, however, adds F.I. Duke, if there were enough seats, the proportion would be the same. See: Ibid. pp. 49–50. Galakhov A.D. Russian literature in 1847 // Otechestvennye zapiski. 1848. T. 50. No. 1. P. 7. Law of God / Comp. Seraphim (Slobodskoy), archpriest. Reprints. reprint Ulyanovsk, 1997. P. 585. “The human will is free; Without free will there is no moral being. A person will turn into a machine if his free will is taken away,” P. Morozov recalled the main foundations of Christian teaching. See: Morozov P. Decree. op. P. 70. “People are so stupid that they must be forcibly led to happiness,” from a letter from V.G. Belinsky to V.P. Botkin September 8, 1841. See: Belinsky V.G. Collection cit.: In 9 volumes. M., 1982. T. 9. P. 484. Filaret, Metropolitan of Moscow. Word on the birthday of the Sovereign Emperor // Filaret, Metropolitan of Moscow. Words and speeches: In 3 hours. St. Petersburg, 1846. Part 3. pp. 39–43. The life of Elder Seraphim, hieromonk of the Sarov monastery, desert dweller and recluse. Klin, 2003. P. 390. Ostrovsky A.N. Full collection cit.: In 10 volumes. M., 1960. T. 6. P. 446. Below, the text of the play is quoted from this edition. Stein A.L. Master of Russian drama. M., 1971. pp. 338–377. See: Life of Elder Seraphim, Sarov monastery, hieromonk, desert dweller and recluse. P. 391. Quote from: Life of Elder Seraphim, Sarov Monastery of Hiermonk, Desert Dweller and Recluse. P. 390. Blagoy D.D. The world is like beauty. About “Evening Lights” by A. Fet. M., 1975. P.38. Blok G.P. The Birth of a Poet: The Tale of Fet's Youth. L., 1924. P. 32. Tarkhov A.E.Preface // A.A. Fet. Works: In 2 vols. M., 1982. T. 2. P. 390. Struve N. About Fet's worldview: Was Fet an atheist? // Bulletin of the RHD. 1983. No. 139. pp. 175–177. Etkind E. “On the worldview of A.A. Feta": About Feta's worldview and the culture of polemics // Bulletin of the RCD. 1984. No. 141. P. 171. Struve N. Was Fet an atheist? (response to a letter from Prof. E. Etkind). P. 175. Here and further poems cited. by: Fet A. Poems and Poems / Enter. article and notes comp. B.Ya. Bukhshtab. L., 1986. Quote by: Struve N. Decree. op. P. 162. Pushkin A.S. Works: In 3 volumes. M., 1985. T. 1. P. 475. Struve N. Decree. op. P. 163. Saltykov-Shchedrin M.E. About literature. M., 1952. P. 186. Struve. N. Decree. op. P. 170. Makarov M. On the polemic about Fet’s worldview. Shenshin and Fet // Bulletin of the RHD. 1984. No. 142. pp. 303–307. Quoted from: Tarkhov A.E. Man with a sigh // Fet A. Poems. Prose. Letters. M., 1988. P. 9. Dunaev M.M. Orthodoxy and Russian literature: At 6 hours. M., 2001. Shenshina V.A. The poetic world of A. Fet. M., 1998. P. 58. Fet A. My memories. M., 1890. Part 1. P. 201. Quote by: Shenshina V.A. Decree. op. P. 58. Quote by: Afanasyev V. Notes. Extracts. Reflections. Afanasy Fet: poetry and faith. P. 152. Quote by: Fet A.A. Life of Stepanovka, or Lyrical farming. M., 2001. P. 377. Quote by: Afanasyev V. Notes. Extracts. Reflections. Afanasy Fet: poetry and faith. P. 155. Quote by: Elder Silouan of Athos. M., 1996. P. 89. Quote by: Fet A.A. Full collection poem / Ed. B.V. Nikolsky. St. Petersburg, 1908–1910. S. LXX. Struve N. Decree. op. P. 165. Quote by: Shenshina V.L. The poetic world of A. Fet. P. 83. Words of Elder Silouan, quoted. by: Elder Silouan of Athos. P. 89. Chekhov A.P. Notebooks. M., 2000. P. 50 Further quotes from the notebooks are given according to this edition, indicating the pages in the text of the article. Paperny Z.S. Chekhov's Notebooks, M., 1976. P. 13. Kataev V.B. Evolution and miracle in the world of Chekhov (story “Duel”) // Russian literature of the 19th century and Christianity. M., 1997. P. 50. Kataev V.B. Evolution and miracle in Chekhov's world. P. 55. Chekhov A.P. Collection cit.: In 12 volumes. M., 1956. T. 11. P. 9. God's Law. For family and school / Comp. Archpriest Seraphim Slobodskoy. Reprint reprint Ulyanovsk, 1997. P. 587. Dunaev M.M. Orthodoxy and Russian literature: At 6 hours. M., 1998. Chekhov A.P. Collection cit.: In 12 vols. T. 11. pp. 82–84. Chekhov A.P. Collection Op.: In 12 volumes. T. 11. P. 347. Dunaev M.M. Orthodoxy and Russian literature. Part 4. P. 568. Forget-me-not. 1914. No. 1. P. 3. Three books of poems by V. A. Sumbatov have been published abroad: Sumbatov V.A. Poems. Munich: City of Kitezh, 1922; Sumbatov V.A. Poems. Milan, 1957; Sumbatov V.A. Transparent darkness: Poems from different years. Livorno, 1969. Published in Russia: Sumbatov V. In memory of Tsvetaeva // Literary newspaper. March 21, 1990. P. 6; Sumbatov V. Poems // Russian Abroad. Tragedies, hopes, life... M., 1993. Vol. 1. P. 162 163; Sumbatov V. Poems // Return to Russia in poetry... 200 emigration poets. M., 1995. P. 461 464; Sumbatov V. // We lived then on a different planet...: An anthology of poetry from Russian diaspora. M., 1995. Book. 1. pp. 419–429; Sumbatov V. Two souvenirs // Stanzas of the century. Minsk; M., 1995. P. 258; Sumbatov V. Moscow // Lotmanovsky collection. M., 1997. T. 2. P. 767–770; From the legacy of Vasily Aleksandrovich Sumbatov // Essays on Russian literature abroad. M., 2000. Issue. 2. P. 114 135; Sumbatov V. Poems // Roman-magazine XXI century: Guide to Russian literature. M., 2001. No. 4 (16). pp. 66–69; Sumbatov V. New borders: Poems // Roman-magazine XXI century. M., 2003. No. 10 (58). pp. 96–98. Elena Mariusovna, the daughter of the poet’s eldest daughter Natalya (lives in England), wrote in English the history of the family, in which she outlined what she knew from childhood, was preserved in family legends and was partly recorded in documents. Sumbatova-Resta E.M. Family history / Translation from English. // Roman magazine XXI century. 2003. No. 10. P. 98. Sumbatov V.A. Childhood: Manuscript. L. 1 // Home archive of the Sumbatovs. Cambridge. Information about military service units is reported in the article: S. Garzonio. Roman longing for Moscow... V.A. Sumbatov and his unknown poems about Moscow // Lotmanovsky collection. M., 1997. T. 2. P. 765–767. His father died when Sumbatov was still a teenager. The Sumbatovs’ estate was located outside Pereslavl-Zalessky, on the border lands of the Yaroslavl, Moscow and Vladimir regions, not far from the village of Troitsky and the village of Gorki, as we established from an excerpt from the manuscript of V. A. Sumbatov’s autobiographical narrative. The villages stand in the same place and with the same names now, while the estate has not been preserved. See: Alekseeva L.F. The sky in the poetry collection “Poems by V. Sumbatov” (Munich, 1922) // Word and image in fiction: The third joint collection of scientific articles by the Faculty of Russian Philology of the Moscow State Regional University and the Department of Russian Studies and Linguodidactics of the Pedagogical Faculty of Charles University in Prague. M., 2003. pp. 17–27. Sumbatov V.A. Poems. Munich: City of Kitezh, 1922. P. 25. Trubetskoy Yu. V. Sumbatov. Poems. Milan, 1957 // The New Review. New Journal. 1958. Book. 52. P. 302. RGALI. F. 2294. Op. 1. Unit hr. 84. L. 64 rev.–65. Sumbatov V.A. Transparent darkness: Poems from different years. Livorno, 1969. P. 5. Further references to this publication in the text of the article indicating pages in brackets. Gorbov Ya.N. Literary notes. – V. Sumbatov “Transparent Darkness.” Poems from different years. Livorno, 1969 [Rec.] // Revival. 1969. Notebook 215. P. 141. Tyutchev is characterized by poetic structures in which the main and metaphorical parts are equal and mutually enrich each other. Gorbov Ya.N. Literary notes. P. 142. Bobrova E.I. Vasily Sumbatov. “Transparent darkness,” poems from different years // Sovremennik: Journal of Russian culture and national thought. Toronto, 1971. No. 22/23. pp. 157–158. Shmurlo Evgeniy Frantsevich (1853–1934) - Russian historian, collector of historical documents, author of works on the history of Russia. From the 1880s he worked in the Vatican Archives. In the 1900–1910s, he held the position of scientific correspondent of the historical and philological department of the Russian Academy of Sciences at the Vatican Archives. Until 1924 he lived in Rome. In 1921 he organized a Russian academic group and was its chairman until his departure. In 1925–1931 he headed the Russian Historical Society in Prague. He was a member of the Council and the Scientific Commission of the Russian Foreign Historical Archive. Sumbatov V.A. Poems. Munich, 1922. P. 68. Archbishop John Shakhovskoy. Correspondence with Klenovsky. Paris, 1981. [T. VI]. P. 82. Veniamin (Fedchenkov), Metropolitan. World lamp St. Seraphim of Sarov. M., 1996. P. 280. Mumrikov Alexander, deacon. Sarov miracle worker. Life, exploits, miracles // Literary studies. 1990. No. 5. P. 127. Bulgakov S.N. Pushkin’s Lot // Pushkin in Russian philosophical criticism. M., 1990. pp. 278–279 Ilyin I.A. For national Russia. Manifesto of the Russian movement // Slovo. 1991. No. 6. P. 85. Anastasy (Gribanovsky), metropolitan. Pushkin in his attitude to religion and the Orthodox Church // A.S. Pushkin: The Path to Orthodoxy. M., 1999. P. 162. Nepomnyashchiy B.C. Poetry and fate. M., 1983. P. 318. Georgy Florovsky, archpriest. Paths of Russian Theology. Paris, 1937. pp. 391–392. Ilyin I A. Pushkin’s prophetic calling. P. 289. Essays on the history of Russian holiness / Comp. Hieromonk John (Kologrivov). Brussels. P. 385. John of San Francisco (Shakhovskoy), archbishop. Venerable Seraphim // John of San Francisco (Shakhovskoy), Archbishop. Favorites. Petrozavodsk, 1992. P. 431. Anastasy (Gribanovsky), metropolitan. Pushkin in his attitude to religion. P. 178. Konstantin (Zaitsev), archimandrite. Is Pushkin alive? // A.C. Pushkin: The Path to Orthodoxy. P. 270. Frank S. Pushkin as a political thinker // Pushkin in Russian philosophical criticism. M., 1990. P. 398. Ilyin I.A. Prophetic calling of Pushkin. P. 286. Konstantin (Zaitsev), archimandrite. Is Pushkin alive? P. 278. Svetozarsky A. Vladyka Anthony // Word. 1999. No. VI. P. 49.