Not Orthodox
Being not a philosopher, but an ideologist, Dugin identifies himself as an Orthodox and Conservative, from which the very name "Centre for Conservative Studies" is derived. Since Dugin is a member of the Russian Orthodox Church, or, more precisely, of the Conservative Consent (believers are Old Believers, who are recognized by the Moscow Patriarchate), he can be formally called an Orthodox person. From the Christian point of view, if a man is baptized, but has lived his whole life as an atheist and whatever, he still responds to the Last Judgment precisely as a Christian. In this sense, we really have a lot of Orthodox Christians. But as an ideologist and pseudo-philosopher, Dugin is not Orthodox. To be convinced of this, it is enough to read any of his metaphysical books, including the most important on the Orthodox theme - "Metaphysics of the Good News. Orthodox esoterism" (1996), which the adherents of Duginism treat as the writing of all the Holy Fathers together. This happens for a very simple reason - because these people first discover Dugin, and only then Orthodoxy itself, if they discover it at all. Therefore, its supporters do not consider the conformity of Dugin's "theology" in relation to Christian dogmas, as it is not Dugin that is tested by the dogmas, but rather the dogmas itself - Duginism. And if some facts indicate the incompatibility of dogmatic Christianity and "duginism", then "the worse" for these facts. Any attempt to analyse his ideas seriously from dogmatic perspective they immediately call "knocking" and "inquisition" - in general, the behavior of a classical sect.
Nevertheless, not every priest and theologian considers it necessary to pay serious attention to Dugin's books in general, which is quite understandable in human terms, but rather reprehensible for missionary reasons. Our dogmatists often prefer to dig into heresies such as "aftertodoketism" and "psilanthropy", which have almost disappeared from history, without looking around - to the openly anti-Christian heresies which are capturing today many seekers and especially young people. But there are also exceptions to the rule. In particular, the fact that Dugin's teaching is heresy was mentioned by such authorities with theological education as Fr. Daniil Sysoev, Fr. Maxim Kozlov, V. Maximov, A. Lyulka and others. Deacon Andrei Kuraev wrote in his book "The Church in the World of Men" (2007) about Dugin: "This enemy is more dangerous than any Blavatsky (because he is smarter and more educated).Like Blavatsky, it's an attempt to digest Orthodoxy into cabalism. It's enough to remember his article "Kabbalah Messianism". The undisguised apology of terror, the desire to turn Orthodoxy into a revolutionary-terrorist ideology also does not cause a desire to get close to this man" (p.142). "In general, the usual 'esoterism': a continuous "tactical trick" to carry out its work of mutating Christianity into something corresponding to the Kabbalistic-Masonic standards" (p. 144). Finally, Dugin's teaching is understood as heretical in aspecialized reference book of the Missionary Department of the Moscow Patriarchate "New religious communities of Russia of destructive and occult nature" (2002). Why are Orthodox dogmas so united in judging the teaching of Duginsk? Again, it is not necessary to understand in detail the theological views of our author, any Orthodox person can open the book "Metaphysics of the Good News" (1996) and read any excerpt of this type: "In the beginning, Adam was androgynous. <...> He does not have a singular body, but there is a synthesis of all singular bodies and physical objects" (p.45-46) and draw the corresponding conclusions. But one connecting ground is necessary to mention - if there is some affirmative constant in the Dugin doctrine, so it is an apology of so-called "manifestationism", i.e. ideas of origin of the world from divine origin in contrast to the Abrahamic "creationism", that is, the idea of creation of the world from nothing.
"Manifestationism" can indeed be called the common metaphysical denominator of all non-Abrahamic (collectively: pagan) religions and in this respect it can serve as an ideal conceptual basis for the anti-Abrahamic, anti-Biblical front. Needless to say, the idea of creation of the world by the free will of God out of nothing is a fundamental position of the whole world of Christianity, concerning which there are no contradictions in any of the Christian confessions. Although the other two Abrahamic religions, Judaism and Islam, have no absolute consensus on this issue, while Christianity has. However, A. Dugin does not participate in this consensus - the main leitmotif of all his metaphysical texts consists in constant discrediting of Abrahamic creationism and apology of Neo-Abrahamic manifestationism, and this opposition extends to Christian religion itself. It is possible to tell that for Dugin the Orthodox religion is remarkable in the degree in which it corresponds to manifestationism and denies Old Testament, the " Jewish " creationism (hence the interest to Kabbalah as a precedent of the Jewish manifestationism). This opposition leads to quite a few serious conclusions that allow to accuse Dugin of real Gnosticism, and a very radical, Martionist type, which denies the Old Testament and understands Christianity as a revolutionary antithesis of ancient Judaism. Thus, if Christianity as a whole is understood as an antithesis to Abrahamism, Orthodoxy is understood as supposedly the manifestationist pole inside Christianity itself in contrast to Western Catholicism which in Dugin's theology turns out to be the principal enemy. As he writes in one of his articles about Orthodoxy and Catholicism - it is completely "two different religions", while from the dogmatic point of view, Catholicism is the closest doctrine to Orthodoxy. For Dugin, purely political differences with the Catholic West are incomparably more fundamental than worldview differences with the pagan or Muslim East. Within the Orthodox world itself, Dugin constantly contrasts Russian Orthodoxy with Greek Orthodoxy, while within Russian Orthodoxy he chooses the position of "old beliver" as a counterpoint to the almost heretical, in his view, "nikonianism". So the universal truth of Christianity narrows down at him to the limits of Old Believer version, in justification of objective correctness of which he is not especially bothered - after all emotionally adjusted Russian patriot and so it should be clear that all autochthonous is best of all things came, though if to follow this logic up to the end, it is necessary to return at once to pre-Russian paganism, instead of digging in Christianity which has come from far away Palestinians? Of course, this obstinate Marquonism successfully affects the national pagan sentiment of many radicals, allowing them to call themselves "Orthodox", but at the same time to profess their own personal "orthodoxy", which has nothing to do with the confession of the Russian Orthodox Church. I have one simple question for such radicals: if the whole point of Christ's coming was to overcome the "Abrahamic", the "creationist paradigm," then why should they accept this Christianity if they already have their own manifestationist paganism? For example, there is the advaita-vedanta that enjoys the greatest respect among "integral traditionalists". Why should one profess the Orthodox religion in the first place, if other religions also inherit the "integral Tradition", without the "bad" Abrahamic heritage, without the fundamental creationism? There are no answers to these questions, and it is difficult even to imagine a person in the environment of Dugin, who could answer them clearly, and not from his own person, but from the Dugin doctrine itself. [...]
It is hard to imagine any political force that Dugin would refuse to take as an ally in order to destroy the enemy - the list of possible allies here is not limited to Satanism - to the question of his "orthodoxy". Since 1996, he has shown a genuine interest in the teachings of "thelemism" of Aleister Crowley, who, according to Dugin, is justified at least because his Satanism was a reaction to Protestant upbringing. It turns out that any destruction in the West is good only because it undermines the paradigm of Western Abrahamism, and so the Satanist is better than the Protestant. But Dugin is not only guided by purely strategic considerations when addressing this extreme - the justification of Satanism has a strictly substantial, conceptual basis. In 1998, in his "esoteric" magazine "Dear Angel" № 3, in addition to the usual publications of Guenon, Evola, Wirth and other "esoterists", he publishes Aleister Crowley's manifesto "Book of Laws", which has become a kind of "bible" for modern Satanists. The publication of this text is preceded by two theological reflections of Dugin himself - "The Burden of Angels" and "Teaching of the Beast". It is enough to analyze only these two texts to understand the extent to which his teaching is not only far from Christianity, but also in general is essentially anti-Christian. In particular, in the last article he writes that if the creationists accept God-faithful angels, then "manifestationists believe that those angels who have refused to recognize the supremacy of the Creator and their created nature are right" (p.360), which means the fallen angels - demons. Since any duginist will always prefer manifestationism over creationism, it follows that fallen angels are better for him than the faithful. But since Orthodox doctrine in principle will not agree with such manifestationism, Dugin writes that "Orthodox Christians believe that neither of them were completely right" (ibid.). Thus, according to Dugin, an Orthodox Christian in the battle of the angels of light and the angels of darkness can not fully decide on their choices - and this is written by a man who today some consider to be an "Orthodox" figure. It is clear that such "philosophy" is not that of Orthodox conservatism, but it is impossible to talk about any conservatism.
Conservatism has never been a platform for Dugin's politics simply because its declarative goal is not at all to preserve the existing political forms, but rather a "conservative revolution" - to restore the so-called traditional values in a revolutionary way. And Dugin's very political evolution in the 1990s was a consistent movement toward more and more revolutionism, toward open recognition of the ideas of national Bolshevism, communism, and the "new leftists". These ideas were reflected in a concentrated form in his manifesto "Aims and Purposes of Our Revolution" (1995), which was not just a non-conservative text, but an absolutely anti-conservative one. [...] Eurasianism allows a person to pretend to be both a great Russian patriot who cares about national identity, and a broad internationalist who is in love with the "flowering complexity" of the world, and an Orthodox fundamentalist who defends the purity of the pre-Flood rite, and a tolerant ecumenist who calls for "dialogue of cultures", and a white monarchist, and a red revolutionary, and so on and so forth. It is this indistinct and amorphous Eurasian ideology, which, under Dugin's version, has reached its ultimate valence, that can be used very successfully for personal political positioning, but at the same time it absolutely does not allow for the creation of any single movement capable of clearly distinguishing "friends" and "enemies" over a long distance.
It is quite natural that an Orthodox conservative may not like the secular-liberal West, but it does not follow that he should rush into the embrace of the totalitarian-pagan East.
* * *
The Teachings of Alexander Dugin
Being not a philosopher, but an ideologist, Dugin identifies himself as an Orthodox and Conservative, from which the very name "Centre for Conservative Studies" is derived. Since Dugin is a member of the Russian Orthodox Church, or, more precisely, of the Conservative Consent (believers are Old Believers, who are recognized by the Moscow Patriarchate), he can be formally called an Orthodox person. From the Christian point of view, if a man is baptized, but has lived his whole life as an atheist and whatever, he still responds to the Last Judgment precisely as a Christian. In this sense, we really have a lot of Orthodox Christians. But as an ideologist and pseudo-philosopher, Dugin is not Orthodox. To be convinced of this, it is enough to read any of his metaphysical books, including the most important on the Orthodox theme - "Metaphysics of the Good News. Orthodox esoterism" (1996), which the adherents of Duginism treat as the writing of all the Holy Fathers together. This happens for a very simple reason - because these people first discover Dugin, and only then Orthodoxy itself, if they discover it at all. Therefore, its supporters do not consider the conformity of Dugin's "theology" in relation to Christian dogmas, as it is not Dugin that is tested by the dogmas, but rather the dogmas itself - Duginism. And if some facts indicate the incompatibility of dogmatic Christianity and "duginism", then "the worse" for these facts. Any attempt to analyse his ideas seriously from dogmatic perspective they immediately call "knocking" and "inquisition" - in general, the behavior of a classical sect.
Nevertheless, not every priest and theologian considers it necessary to pay serious attention to Dugin's books in general, which is quite understandable in human terms, but rather reprehensible for missionary reasons. Our dogmatists often prefer to dig into heresies such as "aftertodoketism" and "psilanthropy", which have almost disappeared from history, without looking around - to the openly anti-Christian heresies which are capturing today many seekers and especially young people. But there are also exceptions to the rule. In particular, the fact that Dugin's teaching is heresy was mentioned by such authorities with theological education as Fr. Daniil Sysoev, Fr. Maxim Kozlov, V. Maximov, A. Lyulka and others. Deacon Andrei Kuraev wrote in his book "The Church in the World of Men" (2007) about Dugin: "This enemy is more dangerous than any Blavatsky (because he is smarter and more educated).Like Blavatsky, it's an attempt to digest Orthodoxy into cabalism. It's enough to remember his article "Kabbalah Messianism". The undisguised apology of terror, the desire to turn Orthodoxy into a revolutionary-terrorist ideology also does not cause a desire to get close to this man" (p.142). "In general, the usual 'esoterism': a continuous "tactical trick" to carry out its work of mutating Christianity into something corresponding to the Kabbalistic-Masonic standards" (p. 144). Finally, Dugin's teaching is understood as heretical in aspecialized reference book of the Missionary Department of the Moscow Patriarchate "New religious communities of Russia of destructive and occult nature" (2002). Why are Orthodox dogmas so united in judging the teaching of Duginsk? Again, it is not necessary to understand in detail the theological views of our author, any Orthodox person can open the book "Metaphysics of the Good News" (1996) and read any excerpt of this type: "In the beginning, Adam was androgynous. <...> He does not have a singular body, but there is a synthesis of all singular bodies and physical objects" (p.45-46) and draw the corresponding conclusions. But one connecting ground is necessary to mention - if there is some affirmative constant in the Dugin doctrine, so it is an apology of so-called "manifestationism", i.e. ideas of origin of the world from divine origin in contrast to the Abrahamic "creationism", that is, the idea of creation of the world from nothing.
"Manifestationism" can indeed be called the common metaphysical denominator of all non-Abrahamic (collectively: pagan) religions and in this respect it can serve as an ideal conceptual basis for the anti-Abrahamic, anti-Biblical front. Needless to say, the idea of creation of the world by the free will of God out of nothing is a fundamental position of the whole world of Christianity, concerning which there are no contradictions in any of the Christian confessions. Although the other two Abrahamic religions, Judaism and Islam, have no absolute consensus on this issue, while Christianity has. However, A. Dugin does not participate in this consensus - the main leitmotif of all his metaphysical texts consists in constant discrediting of Abrahamic creationism and apology of Neo-Abrahamic manifestationism, and this opposition extends to Christian religion itself. It is possible to tell that for Dugin the Orthodox religion is remarkable in the degree in which it corresponds to manifestationism and denies Old Testament, the " Jewish " creationism (hence the interest to Kabbalah as a precedent of the Jewish manifestationism). This opposition leads to quite a few serious conclusions that allow to accuse Dugin of real Gnosticism, and a very radical, Martionist type, which denies the Old Testament and understands Christianity as a revolutionary antithesis of ancient Judaism. Thus, if Christianity as a whole is understood as an antithesis to Abrahamism, Orthodoxy is understood as supposedly the manifestationist pole inside Christianity itself in contrast to Western Catholicism which in Dugin's theology turns out to be the principal enemy. As he writes in one of his articles about Orthodoxy and Catholicism - it is completely "two different religions", while from the dogmatic point of view, Catholicism is the closest doctrine to Orthodoxy. For Dugin, purely political differences with the Catholic West are incomparably more fundamental than worldview differences with the pagan or Muslim East. Within the Orthodox world itself, Dugin constantly contrasts Russian Orthodoxy with Greek Orthodoxy, while within Russian Orthodoxy he chooses the position of "old beliver" as a counterpoint to the almost heretical, in his view, "nikonianism". So the universal truth of Christianity narrows down at him to the limits of Old Believer version, in justification of objective correctness of which he is not especially bothered - after all emotionally adjusted Russian patriot and so it should be clear that all autochthonous is best of all things came, though if to follow this logic up to the end, it is necessary to return at once to pre-Russian paganism, instead of digging in Christianity which has come from far away Palestinians? Of course, this obstinate Marquonism successfully affects the national pagan sentiment of many radicals, allowing them to call themselves "Orthodox", but at the same time to profess their own personal "orthodoxy", which has nothing to do with the confession of the Russian Orthodox Church. I have one simple question for such radicals: if the whole point of Christ's coming was to overcome the "Abrahamic", the "creationist paradigm," then why should they accept this Christianity if they already have their own manifestationist paganism? For example, there is the advaita-vedanta that enjoys the greatest respect among "integral traditionalists". Why should one profess the Orthodox religion in the first place, if other religions also inherit the "integral Tradition", without the "bad" Abrahamic heritage, without the fundamental creationism? There are no answers to these questions, and it is difficult even to imagine a person in the environment of Dugin, who could answer them clearly, and not from his own person, but from the Dugin doctrine itself. [...]
It is hard to imagine any political force that Dugin would refuse to take as an ally in order to destroy the enemy - the list of possible allies here is not limited to Satanism - to the question of his "orthodoxy". Since 1996, he has shown a genuine interest in the teachings of "thelemism" of Aleister Crowley, who, according to Dugin, is justified at least because his Satanism was a reaction to Protestant upbringing. It turns out that any destruction in the West is good only because it undermines the paradigm of Western Abrahamism, and so the Satanist is better than the Protestant. But Dugin is not only guided by purely strategic considerations when addressing this extreme - the justification of Satanism has a strictly substantial, conceptual basis. In 1998, in his "esoteric" magazine "Dear Angel" № 3, in addition to the usual publications of Guenon, Evola, Wirth and other "esoterists", he publishes Aleister Crowley's manifesto "Book of Laws", which has become a kind of "bible" for modern Satanists. The publication of this text is preceded by two theological reflections of Dugin himself - "The Burden of Angels" and "Teaching of the Beast". It is enough to analyze only these two texts to understand the extent to which his teaching is not only far from Christianity, but also in general is essentially anti-Christian. In particular, in the last article he writes that if the creationists accept God-faithful angels, then "manifestationists believe that those angels who have refused to recognize the supremacy of the Creator and their created nature are right" (p.360), which means the fallen angels - demons. Since any duginist will always prefer manifestationism over creationism, it follows that fallen angels are better for him than the faithful. But since Orthodox doctrine in principle will not agree with such manifestationism, Dugin writes that "Orthodox Christians believe that neither of them were completely right" (ibid.). Thus, according to Dugin, an Orthodox Christian in the battle of the angels of light and the angels of darkness can not fully decide on their choices - and this is written by a man who today some consider to be an "Orthodox" figure. It is clear that such "philosophy" is not that of Orthodox conservatism, but it is impossible to talk about any conservatism.
Conservatism has never been a platform for Dugin's politics simply because its declarative goal is not at all to preserve the existing political forms, but rather a "conservative revolution" - to restore the so-called traditional values in a revolutionary way. And Dugin's very political evolution in the 1990s was a consistent movement toward more and more revolutionism, toward open recognition of the ideas of national Bolshevism, communism, and the "new leftists". These ideas were reflected in a concentrated form in his manifesto "Aims and Purposes of Our Revolution" (1995), which was not just a non-conservative text, but an absolutely anti-conservative one. [...] Eurasianism allows a person to pretend to be both a great Russian patriot who cares about national identity, and a broad internationalist who is in love with the "flowering complexity" of the world, and an Orthodox fundamentalist who defends the purity of the pre-Flood rite, and a tolerant ecumenist who calls for "dialogue of cultures", and a white monarchist, and a red revolutionary, and so on and so forth. It is this indistinct and amorphous Eurasian ideology, which, under Dugin's version, has reached its ultimate valence, that can be used very successfully for personal political positioning, but at the same time it absolutely does not allow for the creation of any single movement capable of clearly distinguishing "friends" and "enemies" over a long distance.
It is quite natural that an Orthodox conservative may not like the secular-liberal West, but it does not follow that he should rush into the embrace of the totalitarian-pagan East.
* * *
The Teachings of Alexander Dugin
In a recent interview, deacon Andrei Kuraev said of Dugin: “This is an enemy more dangerous than any Blavatsky (because it’s smarter and more educated). Like Blavatsky’s, this is an attempt to digest Orthodoxy into Kabbalism. ” Knowing Kuraev’s assessment of the significance of Blavatsky’s life and work, it must be admitted that what was said by Father Andrew is a strong compliment to any enemy of the Church of Christ. And Dugin is an undoubtedly conscious enemy of the Church, intelligent, active and treacherous. This should be demonstrated through Dugin texts, but in the present work, this is inappropriate due to their extreme abundance. A serious revision of Dugin’s teachings would require a lot of time and take a lot of space. Fortunately, a partial analysis has already been done [44], so I hope that with God's help the results of the corresponding study will soon become the public domain. At the end of the article, I prepared a special surprise for the reader, who had the strength and tenacity to read it to the end.
In the meantime, fortunately, we do not need to know in detail either the content of Dugin’s concepts or their true origin. And that's why. It is not always possible to judge a person’s intentions. Another's soul is a mystery. But sometimes this is possible, especially when the person himself reveals his intentions and means of achieving them. Speaking in terms of an organization or structure, it’s enough for us to state in principle that a certain member of it is obviously its enemy, infiltrated by an “agent of influence”, while where it came from, whose agent it is, is not so important for now. The statement of fact is quite enough for his exile.
Let's see that A.G. Dugin thinks of the Church of which he is a member. Let us see what, in his eyes, is the definition and meaning of the Edinoverie [Translator Note: Edinoverie are the Old-Believers in communion with the Moscow Patriarchate] that he belongs to. Here are the texts from the Arko.ru website in which Dugin shares his thoughts:
Edinoverie is not an ecclesiological fact, it is an Eurasian process within the framework of Russian Orthodoxy. Edinoverie is the vector of movement ... from modernism to Tradition, from Raskol [TN: Raskol was the splitting of the Russian Orthodox Church into an official church and the Old Believers] to the Old Believers. Movement is not its ultimate goal. But the constellation of Old Believer sects is also not a goal. For us, faith is a radical center. It is political incorrect content in a politically correct (relatively) form ... With Edinoverie, everything is complicated. It was established under certain conditions to achieve certain goal. Then everything changed many times. Today Edinoverie is a process of a general return of the Russian post-Soviet Orthodox to the roots of their paternal Faith. Edinoverie is not sect, not a separate Church, not a tactical department of the MP.
Naturally, no renunciation of the Nikon heresy takes place when a priest is set up ... Edinoverie is not a given, but a task. The most correct branch is the line of Father Irinarch (Mikhailovskaya Sloboda) near Moscow ... Edinoverie is much more right and reactionary; more right than most right-wing niconians. Endlessly more right.
At the same time, there is such a plus in Edinoverie: nothing prevents it from being universal and penetrating into the environment of the MP, where convinced Nikonians [NT: Nikonains are those who followed Patriarch Nikon after the russian schism] are an insignificant minority (Radonezh and Co), and the majority are either curious left-wingers or people who naively (mistakenly) believe that that the Russian Orthodox Church as it is is a continuation of the true root of Russian Orthodoxy.
Instead of denying it from the outside (from the consensus of sects of the Old Faith in its final form), you can gently and constructively explain to people how it really is. If where you live there is no Edinoverie, form a community or try to create it by other means. According to the provisions of the pre-council meeting of 1917, if the majority of parishioners demand to serve in the old way, this is completely legitimate and their will should be satisfied [45].
Here, although in sleek and foggy form, but most important things is said it. Edinoverie by Dugin is a “Eurasian process” that has a kind of “goal”, for which it is necessary to “penetrate the environment of the MP”. The sympathizers are given the corresponding instruction - to create a cell, a community. Its a schism vocabulary: “Nikonians”, “Shchepotniki”[NT: Old Believers slur word for orthodox believers. Literally means "those who make sign of the cross with three fingers"], “Nikonian heresy”. To believe that "the Russian Orthodox Church as it is is a continuation of the true root of Russian Orthodoxy" is naive and erroneous? It is necessary to seize the opportunity, that is, form a single-faith community. For what? It is clear that it was not for the purpose of saving the soul and not for strengthening the Russian Church, even if only as a “business entity" [46]. But the “constellation of Old Believer sects” is not what is needed. The goal is something else, something unnamed. However, if it is not in the Patriarchate and not in "Old Orthodoxy", then, therefore, it is generally outside of Orthodoxy and its schismatic surrogates!
This is all in the public domain. And this is the 2000th year.
And here is Dugin’s programmatic text “Old Believers and Unified Religion” from the Eurasia portal, a reprint from the publication Eurasian Review No. 10 for 2003. In the first paragraph we read:
The subject of Edinoverie is very important, despite the very complicated attitude towards it from the side of the Old Believers themselves, who traditionally consider this a ploy of the Moscow Patriarchate against them. In fact, the history of Edinoverie is, on the contrary, a strategic line for instilling the Old Faith (genuine Orthodoxy) to the tree of the synodal Church [47].
That’s what it really is! And here is the “process” mentioned:
In fact, Edinoverie is a process - a process of a church-wide conservative revolution ... I am convinced that only in Edinoverie as in the process are there prospects for the healing of the Russian Orthodox Church, the opportunity to return to the solid unshakable ground beyond which our Church has been found since the end of the 17th century.
Here we not only learn that the Russian Church of the Moscow Patriarchate, according to Dugin, does not stand on the stone of the Orthodox faith, but completely outside the solid soil for hundreds of years, but we also receive additional information about the goals of Dugin and those whom he represents. This is neither more nor less, but an internal church revolution. Conservative, that is, this is the very “temptation that comes from the right,” about which father Andrei Kuraev wrote. Not surprisingly, Alexander Gelievich essentially supported [48] the “Conversion” of Bishop Diomede [49].
Furthermore:
The one in the Russian Orthodox Church who stands firmly against Old Believer’s positions, sooner or later he will find his schismatic, anti-national, sectarian essence … Church officialdom must sincerely repent before the Old Belivers, must earn forgiveness.
And it’s not the schismatics or sectarian, but Patriarch Nikon who turns out to be a sectarian and almost the first communist [50]: “he not only curtailed the sacredness, he contributed to the violation of the balances of Holy Russia. In some ways, he was close to the whips - New Jerusalem, etc. It’s very Montanite, very Münzerian.”
Edinoverie is in fact the Old Faith... Recognizing the historical and spiritual righteousness of Avvakum and his followers, Edinoverie professes a somewhat different ecclesiology. [51]
And again - this is an open, accessible text ... The direct apology of schismatics along with the humiliation of the Church, in which Dugin himself is a member and of which he swears allegiance more than one time! These articles are not refuted by Dugin in a single word. On the contrary, his old works are updated [52]. Texts from different years show that Dugin’s attitude towards the Church does not change. In a 2006 interview [53] - it's all the same, in the same words.
Edinoverie has become that spiritual niche that has completely integrated me into the Old Faith ... Edinoverie is a process leading from the New Believers to the Old Faith. Edinoverie today has changed its function. Once it was called to lead people away from the Old Believers, but now it’s not so ... The Old Believers are the salt of the Russian people ... Russia will not be reborn without the Church, and the Church will not be reborn without the Old Belief.
Is it possible that none of the pastors of the Russian Church and its faithful children, as well as their assistants and secretaries, do not know how to use the Internet?
Tell me, how does a person who spews such blasphemy against the Holy Church participate in joint projects with them [54] and even sit on the same podium of the “World Russian National Council” [55]? How does he practice Communion[56]? For what reason did the public Orthodox television channel “Spas” [57] give Dugin the floor for a long time, actually doing his free PR? However, it should not be completely free, because Alexander Gelievich held the post of leader there, it seems even the editor. Why does a secular person, the scientific director of the Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, a member of the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation, Leonid Tishkov seem to be struggling alone against Dugin’s dangerous nonsense [58] does not turn into the state recommended social science study book for schools and universities?
Dugin plans and prepares at least another church schism. As a maximum, we see an attempt to gain control of the Church by methods corresponding to the Heresy of the Judaizers. Edinover parishes were chosen as the basis for the split. Why? I would not want to think that there are any serious objective grounds for this. I would not want to ...
In conclusion - the promised surprise!
The teaching of A.G. Dugin. Church assessment.
In our life, it often happens that the right hand does not know what the left is doing. Scripture, however, warns that this is only good when giving alms [59]. Before me is a book published by the Missionary Department of the Moscow Patriarchate of the Russian Orthodox Church with the blessing of His Eminence John, Archbishop of Belgorod and Starooskolsky, Chairman of this Missionary Department
That is an official document of our Church. This is the Handbook "New religious associations of Russia of a destructive and occult nature" [60]. The annotation says that the handbook contains data on some “religious and pseudo-religious associations ... on certain dangerous occult and pagan groups” referred to as “experts of state and public organizations of the Russian Federation and other countries.” The book is intended for Orthodox citizens, and is also intended for employees of state institutions and public associations. ” With your permission, I repeat once again that the reference in the Handbook is about associations of a destructive and occult nature. This is important because in it immediately after the section devoted to purely satanic movements, in chapter No. 4, subparagraph 4.9 [61], there is the chapter “The teachings of Alexander Dugin”.
On the Dugin attitude towards the Church, the Collection says:
“Dugin sees the“ bright future ”of Orthodoxy in the combination of the exoteric principle of the Church (i.e., church organization) and pagan esoteric gnosis ... A. Dugin claims that ...“ the only way is [the Gnostics] accepting the traditional religion, and then try to penetrate through spiritual, ritual and intellectual practice within the framework of this religion in its esoteric internal aspects, in its secrets ”[62] ... This is nothing more than a call to create a new direction (sect) inside Orthodoxy, that is, an attempt to split the Churches again "(P.167).
As for the content of the doctrine, having noticed cases when “in his opus A. Dugin simply blasphemed” (p.166) and appreciating some of Dugin’s views as “erroneous and sometimes directly heretical” (p.167), the compiler characterizes the doctrine and religious position A.G. Dugin as a whole as follows:
1. Anti-Orthodox worldview, based on the primacy of non-existence before existence, using the conceptual and linguistic apparatus of metaphysics.2. The presence in the doctrine of concepts directly related to Hindu views (Tantrism, Indian metaphysics), as well as elements of theosophy ...3. Calls for the “reform” of Orthodoxy, in particular by eroding Orthodoxy as a true creed, introducing its opponents into the Church from within, eliminating Orthodox traditions, subjugating it to Islam and ultimately destroying ... As an intermediate stage - the opportunistic use of Orthodoxy to achieve its own political goals ...4. A clear preference for Islam over other creeds against the background of an indulgent attitude towards Freemasonry and Satanism.5. The creed of A. Dugin ... focused on the elite social layer ... this translates the creed into the rank of occult-mystical ideology, as a result of criticism of the conceptual provisions of the main world religions.6. The arbitrary interpretation of the basic tenets of Christianity and the wide dissemination of such materials through publicly available sources of information expel A. Dugin beyond the church fence ”(p. 171).
Alexander Lyulka
Moscow, 2008
The triumph of Orthodoxy44 see links in this article
45 http://www.arcto.ru/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1228
46 the usual term for the Dugin neo-Eurasians for the Russian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate
47 http://www.evrazia.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1326
48 http://www.svoboda.org/content/transcript/381007.html
49 http://www.pravoslavie.ru/news/070309173512 , http://www.patriarchia.ru/db/text/303169.html
50 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Münzer
51 see the chapter on V.I. Carpets
52 http://www.arcto.ru/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1468
53 http://www.portal-credo.ru/site/print.php?act=news&id=46941
54 http://www.fap.ru/trans.php?id=2245&show=ff&prevdate=20040122201959&direction=fw
55 http://www.kreml.org/opinions/143774234
56 http://www.interfax-religion.ru/print.php?act=print_media&id=1129 we note that after the bishop’s service, Dugin read a report where “he noted that at different times the term“ faith ”carried a different meaning”.
57 http://evrazia.info/article/2552
Source: https://alyulka.livejournal.com/119427.html
* * *
Alexander Dugin: the secret has become apparent
For all those interested in politics, ideology, and religion the nature of the worldview of Alexander Gelievich Dugin is already known - he is a Satanist.
However, there are, after all, little-informed people, and they can easily be deceived when Dugin starts to tell them that he is an Old Believer. I have been following this Old Believer since the beginning of the 1990s when he joined the National Bolshevik Party, created by E.V. Limonov. I like Limonov as a writer, but the ideology of the party created by him and Dugin was hostile to me because I am a Christian and a social democrat.
E. Limonov himself is a visionary, artist and atheist. As an artist, he is interested in always being in the spotlight, and in the party, he is the leader. But, as strange as it can sound, Ideological questions for him are secondary (which is proved by his current alliance with the liberals).
Dugin was from the very beginning the ideologist of National Bolshevism. The dark mystic, a student of Golovin and an admirer of Aleister Crowley, Dugin is a man of the Black Hundreds fascist views in the political field (he was a member of the Pamyat, video), and the occult, gnostic in the field of religion. When, by the end of the 1990s, it became clear that National Bolshevism had a chance to become a state ideology, Dugin was not on the way with Limonov who wanted to stay in opposition. Dugin went to work for the State Duma representative G. Seleznev, and later became an ardent supporter of V. Putin and the junta (Dugin dad was an officer of the GRU). True to himself, he created the NBF (National Bolshevik Front without Limonov), the Eurasian Movement; etc., etc.
In the 1990s, I regularly acquired Limonka (I thought that you need to know the enemy in person). And once I even went to NBP bunker on Maly Kochki for some open meeting, but (for reasons beyond my control) didn’t get there... This newspaper was really interesting read in stale Yeltsin's reality.
In the issue, part of which I scanned, there is an interesting article by the leader and ideologist of the NBP Dugin, “The Gnostic”, and an anonymous editorial column: the article “How to Understand Occultism” also reflects the views of the then leader of the party A. Dugin.
Limonka № 27
December 1995
How should occultism be understood
There are two kinds of occultism "soft" and "hard." "Soft" is when quite prosperous bourgeois, climacteric aunts and sick young men with poor skin gather and talk for hours about Shambhala, astral, immortality, spirits and Buddhism. This includes whining a la Grebenshchikov with a burp of undigested Castaneda (Golovin once dubbed it "Castaedov"), Gurdjieff, badly translated (from English (sic!) into Russian) Zen treatises, etc. Such "soft" occultism, also called "new age", is an artificial surrogate for the layman, slipped by the System instead of a full spiritual life. This, in short, is shit.
There is, however, "hard" occultism. A rather revolutionary direction, claiming that the world in which we live is based on arrogant hypnosis of a profane con man, created from horse shit scientists, foolish politicians and stupid journalists who inspire everyone with false and ideas about a person, reality, structure of the Universe, science, etc. Such "hard" occultism (somewhat close to traditionalism) aggressive, dangerous to the System and oriented for the nonconformist. The super goal of ‘’hard’’ occultism is to arrange a complete revolution of the foundations of a profane civilization, return to the norms of a sacred society, create “new people”, magicians that free from the illusory clichés of our stupid world and have some fun in general. “Hard” occultists are fond of Meyrink, Lovecraft, Evola, Kremermeri, Guilo von List, and especially to hated by “soft” occultists Aleister Crowley who calls himself various indecent names (for example, That Mega Therion). So there are all kinds of occultists out there. The NBP leans, of course, to the "hard".
 |
| The english translation of Dugin's "The Gnostic" can be found in the "New Resistance" site. However, some parts of the original are omitted in the english translation. In the version bellow I added the omitted parts. |
The Gnostic by Alexander Dugin
The time has come to reveal the truth, to expose the spiritual essence of what boot-licking ordinary people call “political extremism.” We have confused them enough by changing the labels of our political sympathies, the color of our heroes, and by passing from fire to cold, from “rightism” to “leftism” and back again. All of this has been but an intellectual artillery barrage, a kind of ideological warm-up.
We have frightened and tempted the extreme right and extreme left, and now both, and others, have lost their way, strayed from the beaten tracks. This is amazing. As the great Evgeniy Golovin liked to repeat: “He who goes against the day, should not fear the night.” There is nothing more pleasant than when the group is slipping out from under your feet. This is the first experience of flight. It kills vermin. It tempers angels.
Advocates of stability, gradualism, an evolutionary approach, conservatives, progressivists, in short, conformists, were seriously concerned by our uncontrollability and deliberate hatred of compromise.
Finally, they felt that there were forces that would find fault not with ideas, but with types. So this time they will not be able to sit out. For the first time in history, purges threaten to touch not political, ethnic, religious or social groups, but the entire gigantic social body of opportunists, scum, shifters, townsfolk. The scarlet scite of National Bolshevism will pass both right and left, authorities and their opposition, and white and red, if their decay, alienation, and poisonous swagger of brazen mediocrity will be clearly visible ... If we see grimaces of the "evil Demiurge", our main ancient enemy, behind their masks.
Who are we, really? Whose menacing face is it all the more clearly peering out from the paradoxical, radical political movement with the terrifying name “National Bolshevism?”
Today we can respond without any ambiguity and vagueness. But this necessitates a brief excursion into the history of the spirit.
Mankind has always had two types of spirituality, two paths – the “Right Hand Path” and the “Left Hand Path.” The first is characterized by a positive attitude towards the surrounding world, in which harmony, balance, bliss, and peace are seen. All evil is but a particular instance, a local deviation from the norm, something insignificant, transient, having no deep, transcendental causes. The Right Hand Path is also called the “Milky Way.” It does not subject man to any particular suffering; it protects him from radical experiences, leads him away from immersion in suffering, and away from the nightmare of being. This is a false path. It leads to slumber. It leads to nowhere.
The second path, the “Left Hand Path”, sees everything in the reverse. There is no milky bliss, but black suffering; no silent calm, but the festering, fiery drama of split being. This is the “path of wine.” It is destructive, terrifying. Wrath and rage reign on it. In this path, all reality is perceived as hell, as ontological exile, as torture, as submersion into the heart of some kind of unthinkable catastrophe originating from the very heights of the cosmos.
If on the first path everything appears to be good, then on the second path everything appears evil. This path is monstrously difficult, but it is the only true one. On this path it is easy to stumble and even easier to disappear. It guarantees nothing. It entices no one. But only this path is correct. He who takes this path will gain fame and immortality. He who survives it will prevail and receive an award that is higher than being.
He who goes down the Left Hand Path knows that it will end. The dungeon of matter will collapse and be transformed into a heavenly city. A chain of initiates passionately prepares the desired moment, the moment of the End, the triumph of total liberation.
These two paths are not two different religious traditions. Both are possible in all religions, in all confessions, in all churches. There are no external differences between them whatsoever. They concern the most intimate parts of man, his secret essence. They cannot be chosen. They themselves choose a man to be their victim, their servant, their instrument, their weapon.
The Left Hand Path is called “gnosis”, “knowledge.” It is just as bitter as knowledge and it generates sorrow and cold tragedy. Once upon a time in antiquity, when mankind still attached decisive importance to spiritual things, the Gnostics created their own theories on the level of a philosophy, a doctrine, the cosmological mysteries, and on a cult level. Gradually people degenerated, stopped paying attention to the sphere of thought, and plunged into physiology in search of individual comfort in everyday life.
But the Gnostics did not disappear. They moved the dispute to a level of things understandable to modern citizens.
Some of them proclaimed slogans of “social justice”, developed theories of class struggle, and communism. The Mystery of Sophia became “class consciousness”, and the “struggle against the evil Demiurge, the creator of the cursed world” took the shape of social battles. The threads of ancient knowledge stretched to Marx, Nechaev, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, and Che Guevara. The wine of socialist revolution, the joy of rebellion against the forces of fate, and the sacred, berserker passion for total destruction of all that was black for the sake of obtaining a new, otherworldly Light.
Others opposed the ordinariness of everydayness with the secret energy of race, the noise of blood. Against mixing and deformity they raised laws of purity and a new sacrality, a return to the Golden Age, the Great Return. Nietzsche, Heidegger, Evola, Hitler, and Mussolini draped the Gnostic will in national, racial teachings.
It is quite right that the communists didn’t care much for workers, nor Hitler for Germans, but not out of cynicism. Both were obsessed with a deeper, more ancient, more absolute aspiration, the common Gnostic spirit, the secret and terrible light of the Left Hand Path. What workers, what “Aryans”… The point is totally different.
Other creative personalities summoned to the Left Hand Path, the path of gnosis, also floundered between “reds” and “blacks” and “whites” and “browns” in their spiritual quests. Entangling themselves in political doctrines, going to extremes, and yet unable to clearly express the metaphysical contours of their obsession, artists from Shakespeare to Artaud and from Michelangelo to Eemans, from the troubadours to Breton, have drunk the secret wine of suffering, greedily soaking up in society, passions, sects and occult brotherhoods the disparate fragments of a terrible teaching that leaves smiling impossible. The Templars, Dante, Lautréamont. They never smiled in their lives. This is a sign of a special chosenness, a trace of a monstrous experience of something that has been common for all Left Hand Pathers.
The Gnostic looks at our world with his severe gaze – the same gaze as that of his predecessors, the links in the ancient chain of the elect of Horror. A repulsive picture reflects in his eyes. A mad West in consumer psychosis. An East whose dullness and pathetic submissiveness disgusts. A sunken world, a planet lying on the bottom.
“In underwater woods, rush is useless and motion ceases…” (Golovin)
But the Gnostic does not abandon his cause. Not now, not tomorrow, not ever. Moreover, he has every reason to celebrate on the inside. Did we not tell the naive optimists of the “Right Hand Path” where their excessive ontological trust will lead? Did we not predict the degeneration of their creative instinct down to the grotesque parody that is today’s conservatives, who have reconciled with everything that horrified their more sympathetic (but no less hypocritical) predecessors just a few millennia ago? They didn’t listen to us. Now let them blame themselves and read New Age booklets or marketing handbooks.
We have forgiven no one. We have forgotten nothing.We have not been deceived by the changes in social decorations and political (wanna-be) actors.We have a very long memory. We have very long hands.We have a very severe tradition.
We sing “Marseillaise”, “The Internationale”, “Horst Wessel”, “Giovinezza” on same motive, the disturbing motive of the End. Our Common End.
The 64,797th year of our struggle is coming to an end.Struggle with you.
Don’t hope that you will get rid of us so easily. Not even death will help. Do you think there are no agents of ours?
The labyrinths of being, the spirals of thoughts, the whirlpools of anger…
In St. Petersburg, a group of National Bolsheviks discovered Rodion Raskolnikov's axe. Does your necks itching already?
Source: https://tapirr.livejournal.com/2857091.html
* * *
Dugin and Crowley
After reading the note of Gurianov Pavel about Dugin, I was interested in the following words: Throughout the 90s, Dugin entered various organizations and movements (NBP, the Old Believer community) and was trying to impose on them occult Gnosticism as the true content of their ideology. During his collaboration with Limonov and the National Bolshevik Party he participated in specific events (see video below). In the video, Dugin, and Limonov participate in a concert called “Kurekhin for Dugin”.
Here is what the NBP Limonka newspaper (No. 24) wrote about the concert:
... Limonov and Dugin, of course, in a nutshell, are pure politics, but at the same time their role in the concert was rather close to the function of “mistagogues”. Chairman Limonov read out a list of angels who remained in heaven and descended from there .... Dugin, on the other hand ... proclaimed some mysterious spells in French and Russian associated with the number 418 … The Puppet Theater played the episode from Golden Dawn sexual magic practices, an executioner dressed in a Ku Klux Klan costume ran around in a giant wheel, people tied to burning crosses drawing fiery swastikas in the air while rotating. Necrorealists showed a trick of turning a man into a goat and a striptease of a naval officer. Then the artists of the Kostroma group dressed in the costumes of lunatics carried out the Babylonian Harlot in the 60s nylon poisonous outfit on the platform, which danced a magnificent dance of the end of the world;
The concert, organized for Dugin, in itself can be evaluated as a black mass. But the participants in the concert did not hide it, they commemorated Aleister Crowley, the black magician, and satanist.
Dugin’s interest in Aleister Crowley is not accidental. The fact is that in 1993 Dugin met with Christian Boucher, the head of the French branch of the Order of the Oriental Templars in Moscow.
Here's what they write about it on the website of the “Stavros” Center of the Moscow Patriarchate of the Russian Orthodox Church:
The Order has a reputation for being Satanic, preaching sexual magic and the African Voodoo cult. Boucher’s visit inspired Dugin so much that he decided to immediately publish “At the End of the World”, an almanac of all the fundamental works of the chief theoretician of the Order Aleister Crowley, who called himself the “Great Beast” (for Christians, he is simply a Satanist and Antichrist).
After such tricks, Dugin, today is already known for the “flexibility” of his statements and actions, rushed to the Old Believers. It is a pity that they did not know about such facts the biography of Mr. Dugin. Otherwise, they would teach him not to hag around satanic covens…
* * *
Recommended reading:
https://stavroskrest.ru/content/nikita-kaledin-aleksandr-dugin-ili-podpole-vyhodit-naruzhu
http://www.pravoslavie.ru/analit/raznie.htm
http://www.religare.ru/2_71336.html
http://www.russ.ru/pole/Ne-konservativnaya-ne-pravoslavnaya-ne-filosofiya
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário