Autopoiesis of the Discourse of Religious Tolerance (Early Intercultural Communication in the 19th Century)

The problem of religious tolerance is becoming more and more relevant both for the Russian Federation and the modern world as a whole, since not only the media, but also academic publications almost every day inform us about conflicts between religious communities of local and global scale. The article examines a number of new aspects of the phenomenon of religious tolerance that are revealed when it is described as an autopoiesis of a specific intercultural communicative discourse. This specific discourse is explicitly presented in the texts of the 19th centuries and later texts included in the database of the academic linguistic resource National Corpus of the Russian Language. The texts manifest special forms of implicit tolerance, which is formed, developed and transformed in the global context of intercultural communication, which seeks to distribute the true (“due”, “normative”) and superstitious (“false”, “forbidden”). Starting with the most ancient texts supersticious is intended to mark the difference between permissible (“tolerant”, “ridiculed”) and the unconditionally forbidden (“dangerous”, “intolerant”). The development of communication from the most ancient face-to-face communication to written forms in urban cultures and mass media images of global reality contributes to the formation of an imperial understanding of local features in modern culture. A number of materials from the Russian history of the 19th century show us in detail the development of discourse of tolerance in dialectics with the discourse of intolerance. We can see it from the era of the creation of the Holly Alliance by Alexander I, in which Orthodox Christians, Catholics and Lutherans were proclaimed one Christian people to protective triad of Uvarov and national romanticism, which sought not only to distance itself from everything different, but also to enter into a multifaceted intercultural dialogue. This development placed issues concerning true

1. Duvakin, E. N. and Naumova, I. N. (eds) (2013) ‘Prohibitions and Prescriptions in Folklore’, in 17th Annual Conference in memory of prof. Yuri Lotman. Moscow: Rossijskij gosudarstvennyj gumanitarnyj universitet Publ. (In Russian).

2. Dandamaev, M. A. (1985) Politicheskaia istoriia Akhemenidskoi derzhavy [A political history of the Achaemenian empire]. Moscow: Izd-vo ‘Nauka’, Glav. red. vostochnoĭ lit-ry Publ. (In Russian).

3. Maturana, H. R. (1980) ‘Biology of cognition’, in Maturana, H. R., Varela, F. J., and Beer, S. (eds) Autopoiesis and cognition the realization of the living. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Pub. Co., pp. 5–58.

4. Luhmann, N. (1997b) ‘1.4. Differenzierung’, in Die Gesellschaft der Gesellschaft. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. (Russ.ed.: (2006) Differenciacija. Moscow: Logos Publ.).

5. Foucault, M. (1969) L’archéologie du savoir. Paris: Gallimard. (Russ.ed.: (2004) Archeologiia znaniia. Saint Petersburg: Gumanitarnaya akademiya; Universitetskaya kniga Publ.).

6. Arinin, E. I. (ed.) (2020) Religiia i molodezh’: problemy glokal’nogo v mezhdunarodnoi kommunikatsii [Religion and Youth: Problems of Glocal in International Communication]. Vladimir: Arkaim Publ. (In Russian).

7. Vulphius, А. G. (1911) Ocherki po istorii idei veroterpimosti i religioznoi svobody v XVIII veke [Essays on the history of the idea of religious tolerance and religious freedom in the 18th century]. Saint Petersburg: Tip. M.A. Aleksandrova Publ. (In Russian).

8. Hobbes, T. (1651) Leviathan, or The matter, forme, & power of a common-wealth ecclesiasticall and civill. London: Printed for Andrew Crooke. (Russ.ed.: (1991) ‘Leviafan, ili materiia, forma i vlast’ gosudarstva tserkovnogo i grazhdanskogo’, in Sochineniia v 2 t.: T.2 [Collected Works: in 2 vol.: Vol. 2]. Moscow: Mysl’ Publ.).

9. Locke, J. (1689) A Letter concerning toleration. London: Printed for A. Churchill. (Russ.ed.: (1988) ‘Poslanie o veroterpimosti’, in Sochineniia v 3 t. T.3. [Collected Works: in 3 vol. Vol. 3]. Moscow: Mysl’ Publ., pp. 91–134.).

10. Schokhin, V. K. (2010) ‘Philosophy of Religion: the Beginning of Self-Reflexion’, in Philosophy of religion: an Almanac: 2008-2009. Moscow: Languages of Slavonic Cultures Publ., pp. 16–38. (In Russian).

11. Hume, D. (1757) ‘The natural history of religion’, in Four dissertations. London: Printed for A. Millar, pp. 1–117. (Russ.ed.: (1996a) ‘Estestvennaia istoriia religii’, in Sochineniia: v 2 t. T.2. [Collected Works: in 2 vol. Vol. 2.]. Moscow: Mysl’ Publ., pp. 315-378).

12. Hume, D. (1779) Dialogues concerning natural religion. London: Bernard Quaritch. (Russ.ed.: (1996b) ‘Dialogi o estestvennoj religii’, in Sochineniia: v 2 t. T.2. [Collected Works: in 2 vol. Vol. 2.]. Moscow: Mysl’ Publ., pp. 379-482).

13. Hume, D. (1753) ‘Essay XXIV. Of National Characters’, in Essays and Treatises on Several Subjects: in 4 vol. Vol. 1. London: Printed for A. Millar, pp. 277–300. (Russ.ed.: (1996с) ‘Esse. O natsional’nykh kharakterakh’, in Sochineniia: v 2 t. T.2. [Collected Works: in 2 vol. Vol. 2.]. Moscow: Mysl’ Publ., pp. 605-621).

14. Kireevskiy, I. V. (1911) ‘Deviatnadtsatyi vek [Nineteenth century]’, in Polnoe sobranie socinenij I.V. Kireevskogo: v 2 t. T. 1. [Kireevskiy Complete Collected Works: in 2 vol. Vol. 1.]. Moscow: Put` Publ., pp. 85-108. (In Russian).

15. Nikitin (Archimandrite Augustine), D. E. (2015) Chramy Nevskogo prospekta : iz istorii inoslavnych i pravoslavnoj obscin Peterburga [Temples of Nevsky Prospect. From the history of the heterodox and Orthodox communities of St. Petersburg]. Moscow: Centrpoligraf Publ. ; Saint-Petersburg: Russkaja trojka Publ. (In Russian).

16. Luhmann, N. (1997a) ‘1.3. Evolution’, in Die Gesellschaft der Gesellschaft. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Verlag. (Russ.ed.: (2005) Evoliutsiia. Moscow: Logos Publ.).

17. Durkheim, E. (1912) Les formes élémentaire de la vie religieuse : le système totémique en Australie. Paris:

18. Alcan. (Russ.ed.: (2018) Elementarnye formy religioznoi zhizni. Totemisticheskaia sistema v Avstralii. Moscow: Delo Publ.).

19. Waal, F. de (1982) Chimpanzee politics : power and sex among apes. London: Cape. . (Russ.ed.: (2014) Politika u shimpanze: Vlast’ i seks u primatov. Moscow: Izd. Dom Vysshei shkoly ekonomiki Publ.).

20. Khenkin, S. M. (2013) ‘Musul’mane v Ispanii: metamorfozy istoricheskogo bytiia [Muslims in Spain: Metamorphoses of Historical Life]’, Novaia i noveishaia istoriia, (4), pp. 50–64. (In Russian).

21. Priselkov, M. D. (1916) Khanskie iarlyki russkim mitropolitam [Khan’s labels to Russian metropolitans]. Petrograd: Tip. Nauch. delo. Publ. (In Russian).

22. Sevastianov, I. V. (2010) ‘Tatary-Kryasheny: Pravoslavie v Turskom Mire [The Christened Tatars: Orthodoxy in the Turkic World]’, Vostok. Afro-aziatskie obshchestva: istoriia i sovremennost, (6), pp. 15–27. (In Russian).

23. Krasnozhen, M. (1900) Inoviertsy na Rusi: T. 1. [Gentiles in Russia: Vol. 1.]. Yuryev: Tip. K. Mattisena Publ. (In Russian).

24. Macarius (Bulgakov), Bishop. (1855) Istoriia Russkogo raskola, izvestnogo pod imenem staroobriadstva [The history of the Russian schism, known as the Old Believers]. Saint Petersburg: Tip. Mor. m-va. Publ. (In Russian).

25. Tsvetaev, D. V. (1886) Iz istorii inostrannykh ispovedanii v Rossii v XVI i XVII vekakh [From the history of foreign confessions in Russia in the 16th and 17th centuries]. Moscow: Univ. tip. Publ. (In Russian).

26. Zenkovsky, S. A. (2009) Russkoe staroobriadchestvo [Russian Old Believers]. Moscow: Kvadrat; In-t DI-DIK; Kvadriga Publ. (In Russian).

27. Melnikov, F. E. (1999) Kratkaia istoriia drevlepravoslavnoi (staroobriadcheskoi) tserkvi [Brief history of the Old Orthodox (Old Believer) Church]. Barnaul: Izd-vo BGPU Publ. (In Russian).

28. Pulkin, M. V. (2013) Samosozhzheniia staroobriadtsev (seredina XVII - XIX v.) [Self-immolation of Old Believers (mid-17th – 19th centuries)]. Moscow: Univ. Dmitrija Pozarskogo Publ. (In Russian).

29. Popov, A. V. (1904) Sud i nakazaniia za prestupleniia protiv very i nravstvennosti po russkomu pravu [Trial and Punishment for Crimes Against Faith and Morality under Russian Law]. Kazan: Tipo-lit. Imp. un-ta. Publ. (In Russian).