Paskutinio teismo, pragaro ir rojaus samprata Sergejaus Bulgakovo kūryboje

LTStraipsnyje pateikiamos vieno iškiliausių XIX a. pabaigos – XX a. pradžios Rusų Stačiatikių Baž- nyčios teologo ir šventiko Sergejaus Bulgakovo teologinės mintys eschatologinėmis temomis. Tos temos liečia Paskutinio Dievo teismo, dangaus ir pragaro teologines sampratas. Bulgakovas labai moderniai interpretuoja Paskutinį Dievo teismą kaip tiesos akistatą su savo paties pirmapradžiu įvaizdžiu Dievo idėjoje. Tiek, kiek tas „galutinis“ nugyventas žmogaus gyvenimas skiriasi nuo geriausios savo versijos, tokios, kokia galėjo būti pagal Dievo valią, tiek ir patiriamas skausmas dėl nerealizuotos laimės. Tokios akistatos su tiesa pasekmė yra arba dangus, arba pragaras. Bulgakovui pragaras nėra galutinai amžinas. Jis tiki, kad pačiame galutiniame variante, kada laiko ir erdvės nebelieka, pragare esantieji visgi gali patirti Dievo gailestingumą. Pragaras – tai prarastas Dievas, o dangus – surastas Dievas. Tokios mintys dramatiškumo įgauna dar ir dėl to, kad S. Bulgakovo kūryba vyko sudėtingu politiniu, ekonominiu ir kultūriniu laikotarpiu tiek Rusijoje, tiek Europoje. Vyko bolševikų Spalio revoliucija, Pirmasis ir Antrasis pasauliniai karai. Apie šių procesų įtaką teologijai straipsnyje taip pat skiriama dėmesio. Pagrindiniai žodžiai: S. Bulgakovas, eschatologija, Dievo karalystė. [Iš leidinio]

ENA renewal of studies in eschatology occurred at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, and originated in the Reformed Church. Sergei Bulgakov, a priest in the Orthodox Church, made a significant contribution to Protestant and Catholic authors. His main thoughts on hell are found in the great trilogy ‘The Bride of the Lamb’ (1945), and in his last book ‘The Apocalypse of John’ (1948). The Orthodox Church does not have its own teachings on systematic eschatology, but relies more on the Bible and the Early Church Fathers. Thus, Bulgakov is one of the few authors who has tried to systematically present teachings on eschatological truths. Pavel Florensky, another Orthodox priest, also wrote episodically on eschatological topics in his book ‘The Pillar and Ground of the Truth’ (1914), in the chapter on Gehenna. Their world-view was negatively influenced by the ideology of Marxism, which Bulgakov and Florensky perceived as a falsification of reality, a parody of human deification. Marxism, under the guise of scientific progress, only created an illusion of man’s happiness in this life, whereas Christian eschatology was replaced by the present. Our authors claim that man’s death is a moment of self-determination, in which all life is concentrated and time becomes eternity. In death, God and man speak, they both utter their last word, which remains and never ends. In the face of death, man is given the opportunity to repent of his sins and avoid spiritual death and suffering in hell, or to choose separation from God. God did not predestine any man to go to hell. If in the gaze of God and one’s love, truth for a selfish man is hell, then we are everywhere, always and for ever in hell, because truth is everywhere, always and for ever. Bulgakov emphasises that in hell there is only hatred and condemnation, in it we lose the love that is the essence of the divine life.Dislike, hatred and rejection of the Source of Life manifest themselves on four levels: God, self, others, and the world. The condemned hate God, as one desires their repentance, which manifests itself as the death of human selfishness. Florensky argues that perhaps there is a hope of Origen in all of us that eventually everyone will be forgiven, because God is love and love cannot create destruction. This is what the gaze from heaven would look like, from God’s perspective. Meanwhile, it is different when looking from below, i.e. from a human perspective: man’s response to that love is impossible without taking responsibility, there can be no blind love. True human freedom is a choice; therefore, it is impossible to forgive ill will, because it is the product of misused freedom. As long as we theologically claim that God’s love (thesis) exists, we must accept that there is also responsibility for that love (antithesis). Accordingly, there will always be an antinomy between the grace and the salvation of the Lord and the righteousness and perdition of the Lord. By denying the latter antithesis, we would also deny the first thesis. Florensky describes the possibility of the existence of hell as the free choice of a person prone to evil. If a person is prone to evil, ruination, destruction to an extent, which is clearly contrary to the order created by God, then that right cannot be taken away: doom will never satisfy such a being. Such a man is similar to a cursed person, who, like a thirsty creature in the wilderness, sucks his own blood. Forever insatiable, such people reject mercy and curse God who calls them; they cannot contemplate the face of God without anger; they desire God to destroy himself, and at the same time to destroy all creation. The cursed will suffer in the flames of their own anger and will wish to die, but there will be no death, so they will not be able to die.Bulgakov acknowledges that the kingdom of God, as the main theological category of the New Testament, suggests that God will ultimately prevail over everything, and that people living in such a kingdom are and will be saved from internal and external enemies. Jesus Christ will be the ultimate criterion and content of all that we call paradise. As for life after death and judgment, communion with Christ is stressed as a central idea. In his teaching on eschatological realities, Bulgakov remained faithful to the concept of the teachings of the Bible and the Early Church Fathers. If we did not know that we were reading texts written 100 years ago, it would seem that they were created in the present time, because they remain relevant even to the modern person. Keywords: Sergei Bulgakov, eschatology, the kingdom of God. [From the publication]