The Concept of Miracle in Religious Discourse (Semantic Features of Russian and Chinese Cultures in the Perspective of Intercultural Communication)

The relevance of studying the processes of religious consciousness comes from the importance to ensure more coordinated interaction of scientific communities in intercultural communication. The PRC remains one of the key partners of the Russian Federation and partnership requires deeper understanding of the counterpart. This paper analyses social phenomena classified as miracles in Russian and Chinese cultures from the perspective of intercultural communication. To achieve this goal, the authors 1) highlight key theoretical approaches to the study of the semantics of miracle; 2) systematize the available data on key concepts and denotations of the semantics of miracle in Russian culture and supplement existing approaches; 3) establish the key features of the semantics of miracle in Chinese culture; 4) outline approaches to creating a sketch of a universal semantic model of a miracle as an invariant of two cultures; 5) identify the capabilities and boundaries of this model. The research materials included corpuses of national folklore traditions, legal documents, literary and theological works, and scientific (mainly religious) studies. The methodological framework was formed by the approach of N. Luhmann, who defined religion as a variety of forms of the universal anthropological phenomenon of observing of the unknown. Distinguishing descriptions of the first (naive), second (expert) and third (philosophical-synthetic) order, represented by the corresponding languages L1, L2 and L3, allowed to identify the terms traditionally related to the sphere of religion (L1) and to trace their descriptions (L2) and reflection in L1 and L2 within the framework of philosophical and theological writings (L3). As a result, several historically specific interpretations of the concept and the denotations behind it have been identified. They include both universal similarity and local features determined by the historical development of Russian and Chinese societies. For Russia, these features are inextricably linked with the influence of Christianity, where a distinction is made between elitist theological forms and mass believes, often referred to as superstitions. The main lexemes marking the miraculous in Chinese are 奇迹 (qíjì), reflecting the phenomenon of the amazing, surprising; 神迹 (shénjì), applied to the miraculous, God-like, spiritual, but not witches or sorcerers; 妙 (miào) as an aesthetic perception of a miracle, including an incomprehensible mystery; 灵 (líng) marks the supernatural, emanating from the earthly principle yin, therefore associated with folk witchcraft and sorcery. It has been established that in both Russian and Chinese culture, miracle is always combined with a certain worldview (L1), with a complex of ontological statements (L2). Experts (L3) typically turn to the prism of religious disciplines and/or teachings that analyze the correspondence of worldview, ontological constructs and lived religious experience. The sketch of the universal semantic field that makes up the intersecting concepts of Russian and Chinese cultures, obtained as a result of the research, needs further clarification by turning to the sociology of religion and the psychology of religion.

1. Arinin, E. I. and Liu, K. (2022) ‘Concepts of God in the Context of Chinese and Russian Culture: Comparative Religious Analysis (part 1)’, Vestnik Vladimirskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta imeni Aleksandra Grigorʹeviča i Nikolaâ Grigorʹeviča Stoletovyh. Socialʹnye i gumanitarnye nauki, (3), pp. 70–77. (In Russian).

2. Arinin, E. I., Pavlov, M. S. and Liu, K. (2023) ‘Concepts of God in the Context of Chinese and Russian Culture: Comparative Religious Analysis (part 2)’, Vestnik Vladimirskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta imeni Aleksandra Grigorʹeviča i Nikolaâ Grigorʹeviča Stoletovyh. Socialʹnye i gumanitarnye nauki, (1), pp. 71–79. (In Russian).

3. Astapov, S. N. (2017) ‘Veracity of a Miracle: Difficulties of the Approach of Evidentialism’, Voprosy filosofii, (9), pp. 121–130. (In Russian).

4. Chen, Y. and Fomina, M. N. (2022) ‘Zheng Xiaoyun`s Theory of Cultural Identity’, Concept: philosophy, religion, culture, 6(3), pp. 7–21. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.24833/2541-8831-2022-3-23-7-21

5. Filonov, S. V. and Li, X. (2018) ‘Formation and Current State of Religious Studies in China (in Assessments from Outside and from Within)’, Study of religion, (1), pp. 126–143. (In Russian).

6. Hakkarainen, M. V. (2007) ‘Shamanism as a Colonial Project’, Antropologičeskij forum, (7), pp. 156–190. (In Russian).

7. Igina, Y. F. (2008) ‘Genesis of Law Concept on Witchcraft and Legalization of Witch-Hunt (England, 1547– 1736)’, News of Saratov University. Ser. History. Law. International relations, 8(2), pp. 7–20. (In Russian).

8. Illarion (Alfeev), M. (2021) Neudobnyye voprosy o religii i tserkvi [Uncomfortable questions about religion and the church]. Moscow: Poznanie Publ. (In Russian).

9. Lepenysheva, A. (2011) ‘On the Problem of the Method in Concept Studies’, Pushkin Leningrad State University journal, 1(3), pp. 168–174. (In Russian).

10. Luhmann, N. (2002) Die Religion der Gesellschaft. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp (Suhrkamp-Taschenbuch Wissenschaft).

11. Lyutaeva, M. S. (2023) ‘Miraculous in Russian Semantics of the 11th-18th Centuries: the Evolution of Socially Significant Distinctions’, Concept: philosophy, religion, culture, 7(2), pp. 124–137. (In Russian). https:// doi.org/10.24833/2541-8831-2023-2-26-124-137

12. Malinowski, B. K. (1926) Myth in Primitive Psychology. New York: Norton.

13. Malinowski, B. K. (1948) Magic, science and religion and other essays. Glencoe: Free Press. (Russ. ed.: (1998) Magiya, nauka i religiya. Moscow: Refl-book: CEU.).

14. Malinowski, B. K. (2004) ‘Myth in primitive psychology’, Kulʹturologiâ, (1), pp. 40–94. (In Russian).

15. Mikhailova, T. V. (2002) ‘Russkoye zakonodatel’stvo v otnoshenii koldovstva: pravovaya baza russkikh koldovskikh protsessov vtoroy poloviny XVIII veka i yeye spetsifika [Russian legislation regarding witchcraft: the legal basis of Russian witchcraft processes of the second half of the 18th century and its specifics]’, in Antropologiya. Fol’kloristika. Lingvistika. Vyp. 2. [Anthropology. Folkloristics. Linguistics. Issue 2]. Saint Petersburg: Izdatel’stvo Yevropeyskogo universiteta v Sankt-Peterburge Publ., pp. 170–193. (In Russian).

16. Proskurina, V. J. (2017) Imperija pera Ekateriny II: literatura kak politika [The Empire of the Pen of Catherine II: Literature as Politics]. Moscow: Novoe Literaturnoe Obozrenie Publ. (In Russian).

17. Rubets, M. V. (2020) ‘Specificities of translation of some terms of the Russian religious philosophy of the XXI century into Chinese language’, Philosophical Thought, (10), pp. 30–41. https://doi.org/10.25136/24098728.2020.10.33977

18. Ryzhakova, S. I. (2020) ‘Miracle. Identification, description, attitude’, Studia Religiosa Rossica: Russian Journal of Religion, (3), pp. 11–39. (In Russian). https://doi.org/0.28995/2658-4158-2020-3-11-39

19. Savchuk, V. V (2012) ‘Re-cultivation of Archaic’, Pushkin Leningrad State University journal, 2(2), pp. 7–17. (In Russian).

20. Semenova, I. V. and Dong, Q. (2016) ‘The Concept of “Miracle/奇迹” in Russian and Chinese Language Pictures of the World’, Era of Science, (8), pp. 319–326. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.1555/2409-3203-20160-8-313-320

21. Si, Z. (2019) ‘The Path of Formation and Development of Religious Studies in Modern China’, Mirovaâ nauka, (5), pp. 626–629. (In Russian).

22. Stepanov, S. U. (2007) Kontsepty. Tonkaya plenka tsivilizatsii [Concepts. The thin film of civilization]. Moscow: Jazyki slavjanskoj kul’tury Publ. (In Russian).

23. Torchinov, E. A. (2001) Filosofiya kitayskogo buddizma [Philosophy of Chinese Buddhism]. Saint Petersburg: Azbuka-klassika Publ. (In Russian).