Pavel Alexandrovich Florensky (also P. A. Florenskiĭ, Florenskii, Florenskij; Russian: Па́вел Алекса́ндрович Флоре́нский; Armenian: Պավել Ֆլորենսկի, romanized: Pavel Florenski; 21 January [O.S. 9 January] 1882 – December 8, 1937) was a Russian Orthodox theologian, priest, philosopher, mathematician, physicist, electrical engineer, inventor, polymath, neomartyr and folk saint. During the later twentieth century, statements had appeared noting a recognition by the Russian Orthodox Church of him as a saint, though it was later firmly noted that no such decision had been made.
Born on January 9 in the town of Yevlakh, Elizavetpol province (now Azerbaijan). Father Alexander Ivanovich Florensky (30.9.1850—22.1.1908) — Russian, came from a clergy background; an educated, cultured person, but who has lost ties with the church and religious life. He worked as an engineer on the construction of the Transcaucasian Railway. Mother — Olga (Salome) Pavlovna Saparova (Saparyan) (25.3.1859-1951) belonged to a cultural family that came from an ancient family of Karabakh Armenians. Florensky’s grandmother was from the Paatov family (Paatashvili). The Florensky family, like their Armenian relatives, had estates in the Elisavetpol province, where during the unrest local Armenians took refuge, fleeing the onslaught of the Caucasian Tatars. Thus, the Karabakh Armenians retained their dialect and special customs. There were two more brothers in the family: Alexander (1888-1938) — geologist, archaeologist, ethnographer and Andrey (1899-1961) — weapons designer, Stalin Prize laureate; as well as sisters: Yulia (1884-1947) — a psychiatrist-speech therapist, Elizaveta (1886-1967) — married to Konieva (Koniashvili), Olga (1892-1914) — miniaturist and Raisa (1894-1932) — artist, member of the Makovets association.
In 1899 he graduated from the 2nd Tiflis Gymnasium and entered the Faculty of Physics and Mathematics of Moscow University. At the university he meets Andrei Bely, and through him Bryusov, Balmont, Dm. Merezhkovsky, Zinaida Gippius, Al. Block. Published in the magazines “New Way” and “Scales”. During his student years, he became interested in the teachings of Vladimir Solovyov and Archimandrite Serapion (Mashkin). After graduating from the university, with the blessing of Bishop Anthony (Florensov), he entered the Moscow Theological Academy, where he conceived the idea of \u200b\u200bthe essay “The Pillar and Ground of Truth,” which he completed by the end of his studies (1908) (he was awarded the Makariev Prize for this work). In 1911 he accepted the priesthood. In 1912, he was appointed editor of the academic journal “Theological Bulletin” (1908).
Florensky was deeply interested in the notorious “Beilis case” — the falsified accusation of a Jew in the ritual murder of a Christian boy. He published anonymous articles, being convinced of the truth of the accusation and the reality of the use of the blood of Christian babies by Jews. At the same time, Florensky’s views evolved from Christian anti-Judaism to racial anti-Semitism. In his opinion, “even an insignificant drop of Jewish blood” is enough to cause “typically Jewish” physical and mental traits in entire subsequent generations.
He perceives the events of the revolution as a living apocalypse and in this sense metaphysically welcomes it, but philosophically and politically he is increasingly inclined towards theocratic monarchism. He becomes close to Vasily Rozanov and becomes his confessor, demanding renunciation of all heretical works. He is trying to convince the authorities that the Trinity-Sergius Lavra is the greatest spiritual value and cannot be preserved as a dead museum. Florensky receives denunciations in which he is accused of creating a monarchist circle.
From 1916 to 1925, P. A. Florensky wrote a number of religious and philosophical works, including “Essays on the Philosophy of Cult” (1918), “Iconostasis” (1922), and was working on memoirs. In 1919, P. A. Florensky wrote an article “Reverse Perspective”, dedicated to understanding the phenomenon of this technique of organizing space on a plane as a “creative impulse” when considering the iconographic canon in a retrospective historical comparison with examples of world art endowed with the properties of such; among other factors, first of all, it points to the pattern of the artist’s periodic return to the use of reverse perspective and abandonment of it in accordance with the spirit of the time, historical circumstances and his worldview and “feeling of life.”
Along with this, he returned to his studies in physics and mathematics, also working in the field of technology and materials science. Since 1921 he has been working in the Glavenergo system, taking part in GOELRO, and in 1924 he published a large monograph on dielectrics. His scientific work is supported by Leon Trotsky, who once came to the institute for an audit and support visit, which may have played a fatal role in Florensky’s fate in the future.
Another direction of his activity during this period was art criticism and museum work. At the same time, Florensky works in the Commission for the Protection of Monuments of Art and Antiquity of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, being its scientific secretary, and writes a number of works on ancient Russian art.
In 1922, he published at his own expense the book “Imaginaries in Geometry”, in which, with the help of mathematical proofs, he tried to confirm the geocentric picture of the world, in which the Sun and planets revolve around the Earth, and to refute the heliocentric ideas about the structure of the solar system, which have been established in science since Copernicus. In this book, Florensky also proved the existence of a “border between Earth and Heaven,” located between the orbits of Uranus and Neptune.
In the summer of 1928, he was exiled to Nizhny Novgorod, but in the same year, due to the efforts of E.P. Peshkova, he was returned from exile and given the opportunity to emigrate to Prague, but Florensky decided to stay in Russia. In the early 1930s, a campaign was launched against him in the Soviet press with articles of a devastating and denunciatory nature.
On February 26, 1933, he was arrested and 5 months later, on July 26, he was sentenced to 10 years in prison. He was sent by convoy to the East Siberian camp “Svobodny”, where he arrived on December 1, 1933. Florensky was assigned to work in the research department of the BAMLAG management. While in prison, Florensky wrote the work “Proposed State Structure in the Future.” Florensky believed that the best government system was a totalitarian dictatorship with a perfect organization and control system, isolated from the outside world. Such a dictatorship must be headed by a brilliant and charismatic leader. Florensky considered Hitler and Mussolini to be a transitional, imperfect stage in the movement towards such a leader. He wrote this work at the suggestion of the investigation within the framework of a fabricated trial against the “national-fascist center” “Party of the Revival of Russia”, the head of which was allegedly Fr. Pavel Florensky, who gave a confession in the case.
On February 10, 1934, he was sent to Skovorodino (Rukhlovo) to an experimental permafrost station. Here Florensky conducted research that later formed the basis for the book of his colleagues N. I. Bykov and P. N. Kapterev “Permafrost and Construction on It” (1940).
On August 17, 1934, Florensky was placed in the isolation ward of the Svobodny camp, and on September 1, 1934, he was sent with a special convoy to the Solovetsky special purpose camp.
On November 15, 1934, he began working at the Solovetsky camp iodine industry plant, where he worked on the problem of extracting iodine and agar-agar from seaweed and patented more than ten scientific discoveries.
On November 25, 1937, by a special troika of the NKVD of the Leningrad region, he was sentenced to capital punishment and executed.
He was buried in a common grave of those executed by the NKVD near Leningrad (“Levashovskaya Pustosh”).
The official date of death reported to relatives—December 15, 1943—is fictitious.
Rehabilitated on May 5, 1958 (under the 1933 verdict) and March 5, 1959 (under the 1937 verdict)
«The Pillar and Ground of Truth»
This master’s thesis by Pavel Florensky, associate professor of the Moscow Theological Academy, is a theodicy (French théodicée from the Greek θεός and δίκη — God and justice), which involves the expression of a concept that implies the leitmotif — the removal of the contradiction between the existence of «world evil» and the dominant idea of a good and reasonable divine the will that rules the world. The title is taken from First Timothy (3:15). This work, a unique example of renewal in all the features of the style of presentation, is also represented by an aesthetic that is unconventional for the theological genre.
The first publications of the book were made in 1908 and 1912; and subsequently, the defended dissertation was published in expanded form in 1914 (Put Publishing House; the additions mainly concern significantly expanded comments and appendices). The work was approved by the church and educational administration. From the moment the work was published, it was immediately perceived as a significant literary and spiritual phenomenon, and caused numerous responses and controversy — enthusiastic recognition and fairly harsh criticism.
General epigraph of the book (on the title page):
“γνώσις αγάπη γίνεται — “knowledge is generated by love”
St. Gregory of Nyssa. About the soul and resurrection»
“The Pillar,” in its general tendencies, has characteristic features characteristic of the currents of philosophical and social thought in Russia at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries, which for some time now have been integrally called “the philosophy of unity.” What is striking, first of all, is the saturation of sources attracted by the author to the consideration and argumentation of certain theses — starting from Sanskrit and Hebrew, patristics, and ending with the latest works of that time — from J. Lange, A. Bergson and Z. Freud to N. V. Bugaev, P. D. Uspensky and E. N. Trubetskoy. In the book, against the backdrop of a general, “given” theme, problems relating to issues ranging from physiology to color symbolism (from ancient chromatism to the range of the iconographic canon), from anthropology and psychology to theological dogmas are analyzed.
To a large extent, contrary to the indicated approval of the clergy, the book was criticized by orthodoxy (by definition) precisely for eclecticism and the use of sources inherently alien to the scholasticism of demonstrative theology, for excessive “rationality” and a state of mind almost close to “monophysitism.” . And on the contrary, philosophers of Berdyaev’s wing reproach the author for “stylizing Orthodoxy.” And almost a quarter of a century later we encounter the following characterization coming from an emigrant, an Orthodox theologian:
“The book of a Westerner, dreamily and aesthetically escaping in the East. The romantic tragedy of Western culture is closer and more understandable to Florensky than the problems of Orthodox tradition. And it is very characteristic that in his work he retreated back into Christianity, into Platonism and ancient religions, or went sideways into the teachings of the occult and magic… And he himself intended to submit a translation of Iamblichus with notes for his master’s degree in theology.
Prot. Grigory Florovsky »
Be that as it may, this creation worried and continues to worry not only philosophers of different views and directions, but also everyone who is interested in questions that one way or another arise at the points of contact of so many aspects of being and intellect: worldview and faith, reality and knowledge.
One of the founders of intuitionism notes that the book sent by Father Paul in 1913 contributed to his gradual return to the bosom of the church, and by 1918 he believed; another 33 years later he would write:
“Florensky draws a line between irrationalistic intuitionism and Russian intuitionism, which attaches great value to the rational and systematic aspect of the world. Truth cannot be known either through blind intuition, with the help of which scattered empirical facts are known, or through discursive thinking — the desire to reduce the partial into a whole by adding one element to another. truth becomes accessible to consciousness only through rational intuition, which brings the combination of discursive differentiation ad infinitum with intuitive integration to the degree of unity.
N. O. Lossky»
P. A. Florensky attached special importance to the design of the book; close attention was paid to the layout of the publication, typefaces and layout, illustrations and screensavers preceding the chapters. This interest of P. A. Florensky in typography, and engraving, book illustration, and finally, in fine art as such in all its diversity, finds expression in many of his other works; it will also affect his subsequent joint theoretical work with V. A. Favorsky and pedagogical creativity at Vkhutemas.
But back in the spring of 1912, two years before the publication of the work, this is what Pavel Florensky himself wrote to his older friend V. A. Kozhevnikov (1852-1917), who was elected in the same year as an Honorary Member of the Moscow Theological Academy:
“My “Pillar” disgusted me to such an extent that I often think to myself: isn’t releasing it into the world an act of impudence, for what do I really understand in spiritual life? And perhaps, from a spiritual point of view, he will all turn out to be rotten. »
Thus, it can be understood that the characterizing extrapolation of G.V. Florovsky can be considered valid only in relation to this work of P.A. Florensky. And this, in a certain sense, the central work of the novice shepherd demonstrates to a greater extent the enormous potential, breadth of vision and prospects for the development of the latter’s worldview, rather than the credo in its entirety.
Against the background of the above, the following assumptions of Father Pavel himself seem interesting: “1916. IX. 10. The church in which I was so significantly identified turned out to be directed not to the east, but to the west. — Isn’t this a sign of my interest in paganism, in antiquity? — So, in addition to the symbolic meaning, I was also given the contemplation of beauty: the SUNSET and the Lavra. Our church is aimed at St. Sergius — focused on Sergius.”
«At the watersheds of thought»
Main article: At the watersheds of thought
A well-founded explanation of the dialectics of the work of priest Pavel Florensky is given by Abbot Andronnik (Trubachev), who notes that the spirit of theodicy by this time was already internally alien to Father Paul — “The Pillar …”, not yet being published, became a passed stage — and it is no coincidence in the field of spirituality The philosopher’s view was originally the Neoplatonist Iamblichus, whose translation and commentary was intended as a master’s thesis. “The sacraments of marriage (1910) and the priesthood (1911) were the seeds from which the work of Father Paul was able to grow in a new direction — anthropodicy.”
The legend of the Florensky family about the preservation of the head of St. Sergius
Father Paul entered the Lavra through the Assumption Gate and headed to the governor’s cell. What he and Archimandrite Kronid talked about, only the Lord knows. Only the walls of the ancient monastery witnessed the last supper, which was attended by members of the Commission for the Protection of Monuments of Art and Antiquities of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra P. A. Florensky, Yu. A. Olsufiev, and also, probably, Count V. A. Komarovsky and who later became priests S.P. Mansurov and M.V. Shik. They secretly entered the Trinity Cathedral and said a prayer at the shrine with the relics of Sergius of Radonezh. Then they opened the shrine and removed the honorable head of the Reverend, and in its place they put the head of Prince Trubetskoy, buried in the Lavra. The head of the Saint was buried in the sacristy and left the Lavra, having taken a vow of silence, which they did not break in all the hardships of their earthly existence. Only today, bit by bit, from scattered memories, has it been possible to recreate the picture of the events of eighty years ago.<…>
At the beginning of the 30s, a new wave of arrests began; in 1933, P. A. Florensky was arrested. Pavel Aleksandrovich Golubtsov, who later became Archbishop of Novgorod and Starorussia, was initiated into the townsman secret. Golubtsov secretly moved the ark and buried it in the vicinity of the Nikolo-Ugreshsky Monastery not far from Lyubertsy. Soon P. A. Golubtsov was also arrested, and from prison he went to the front. After demobilization, he moved the oak ark to the house of Olsufiev’s niece E.P. Vasilchikova. Shortly before her death, Ekaterina Pavlovna spoke about what she knew about those events.
Ekaterina Vasilchikova was also involved in the Sergiev Posad case.
Miraculously, with the help of E.P. Peshkova, Katya Vasilchikova managed to escape the camps. Ekaterina Pavlovna spoke with trepidation about how she kept the ark, placing a flower pot on it for secrecy. It was as if there was some warmth coming from that place, she recalled. A domestic flower of the lily family lived on the window of the Vasilchikovs’ apartment in a high-rise building on Krasnaya Presnya. The flower dried out and died after its owner several years ago.
On Easter, April 21, 1946, the Lavra was reopened, and the head of the Venerable One secretly took its former place in the tomb of the Venerable One. The relics of the Saint were returned to the Church. The Assumption Cathedral of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra was also returned. The Trinity Cathedral remained under the jurisdiction of the museum. There also remained a silver shrine for relics with a canopy, erected during the reign of Empress Anna Ioannovna. The shrine was given to the Church after one of the visiting strangers expressed bewilderment that the shrine and relics were in different cathedrals. Trinity Cathedral was returned to the Church later. And only then did the relics of the Saint take their place.
It was this secret that priest Pavel Florensky kept during all the years of imprisonment and camps. In this secret of his life there was no place for fear, despondency, or despair. From this life, he was able to communicate with loved ones in the way he continues to do now — through prayer and the Lord’s mediation. “I took… blows for you, that’s what I wanted and that’s how I asked the Higher Will,” wrote Fr. Pavel to his wife and children (March 18, 1934). But he also suffered for preserving the Secret. He protected one of the few undefiled shrines of Russia. Perhaps this was the church service entrusted to him in the main place and at the main moment of his earthly path.
The note “Questions from the priest Father P. Florensky regarding the relics of St. Sergius” has been preserved. The note is written in the handwriting of Yu. A. Olsufiev and is not dated, but from the questions themselves it is clear that they were compiled after the opening of the relics on April 11, 1919. It is very likely that the purpose of some of the questions is to prepare for the replacement of the head of St. Sergius.
From the memoirs of Archbishop Sergius (Golubtsov): “Trubetskoy’s head was buried at the altar of the Spiritual Church, after a memorial service was held for him.” Here Fr. Sergius bequeathed to bury himself.
Quotes
“I learned complacency when I firmly learned that the life of each of us, and peoples, and humanity is led by Good Will, so that one should not worry about anything other than the tasks of today.”
Reviews
“Florensky is the Pascal of our time…
Vasily Rozanov »
“If I were asked how to generally determine the meaning of Florensky for people, I would say that it can be reduced to the powerful direction of our consciousness into the reality of spiritual life, into the reality of communication with the divine world.
Sergey Fudel »
Disagreements
«Imaginaries in Geometry»
Referring to Dante’s Divine Comedy, Florensky opposes Copernicus’ heliocentric system. Interprets the Michelson-Morley experiment as proof of the immobility of the Earth. Declares the “notorious experiment of Foucault” fundamentally unsubstantiated. Commenting on Einstein’s special theory of relativity, Florensky comes to the conclusion that beyond the limit of the speed of light the non-physical “other world” begins. This otherworldly world of imaginary quantities provides a description of the highest eternal reality. Based on the geocentric system, Florensky calculates the distance to this world as the distance at which a body revolving around the Earth in one day will move at the speed of light. Interest in the cosmological model of antiquity is one of the characteristic features of Florensky’s contemporary historical science, which paid great attention to the morphology of space-time of primitive cultures, Antiquity and the Middle Ages.
Antisemitism
In 1913, the Beilis trial took place in Kyiv on charges of the Jew Menachem Mendel Beilis of the ritual murder of a 12-year-old student of the Kiev-Sophia Theological School, Andrei Yushchinsky. Without doubting the existence of the practice of ritual murder among Jews, Florensky sends V.V. Rozanova for anonymous publication of the article “Prof. D. A. Khvolson about ritual murders» and «Jews and the fate of Christians.» V.V. Rozanov includes both articles in the book “The Olfactory and Tactile Attitude of Jews to Blood” as an appendix. At the same time, he calls anti-Semitism “the greatest sin” and bitterly repents that in childhood, through thoughtlessness, he called a girl a dirty anti-Semitic curse. Florensky’s faithful and closest student, Professor A.F. Losev, states in a manuscript seized by censors from “Dialectics of Myth” that according to God’s plan, in the end the Jews “will all be saved,” although he views Judaism as a religion of emptiness — materialism.
Theology
Florensky spoke in the sense that the name of God is God Himself, along with the sounds and letters of this name. In addition, Florensky paid great attention to the magical nature of the word and name.
Florensky wrote in a draft: “It pains me unbearably that the Name-Glorification — the ancient sacred secret of the Church — was taken out into the marketplace and thrown into the hands of those who should not be touched by this, and who, by their very nature, cannot comprehend this. To unschool the mysterious thread that knits the pearls of all dogmas means to deprive it of life… Everyone who raised this matter is to blame, and Fr. Hilarion and b. m., o. John of Kronstadt… Christianity is and should be mysterious. As for the outsiders, let them be Protestant… If earlier and now the fate of the movement and dispute depended on me, I would say: “Lord, all this is nonsense. Let’s take care of the salaries of the clergy and epaulets for bishops” — and I would try to direct interests and attention somewhere in the direction … »
Family
In 1910 he married Anna Mikhailovna Giatsintova (1889-1973). They had five children: Vasily, Kirill, Mikhail, Olga, Maria.
The second son, Kirill, is a geochemist and planetary scientist.
Grandchildren:
Pavel Vasilievich Florensky (b. 1936), professor at the Russian University of Oil and Gas, academician of the International Slavic Academy of Sciences, Arts and Culture, academician of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, member of the Union of Writers of Russia, head of the Expert Group on Miracles at the Synodal Theological Commission of the Russian Orthodox Church.
Hegumen Andronik (Trubachev) is the director of the Center for the Study, Protection and Restoration of the Heritage of Priest Pavel Florensky, director of the Museum of Priest Pavel Florensky in the city of Sergiev Posad, founder and director of the Museum of Priest Pavel Florensky in Moscow.
Memory, Monument
On December 5, 2012, in Sergiev Posad, the grand opening of the memorial sign “To those who suffered for their faith in Christ during the years of persecution and repression of the 20th century,” installed by the Foundation for Science and Culture of the priest Pavel Florensky, took place. The unveiling of the sign was timed to coincide with the anniversary date — the 75th anniversary of the execution and martyrdom of priest Pavel Florensky (December 8, 1937). The author of the project is Honored muralist, member of the Moscow Union of Artists Maria Tikhonova.
Author about the idea of the monument:
“The main idea of the memorial sign is the Cross, which breaks through the figurative vice of the heavy stone surface with light.” “The red granite pedestal is also in the form of a cross made of several chipped parts, which more strongly reflects the idea of martyrdom and heroism at that difficult time.”
