ფილოსოფიურ-თეოლოგიური მიმომხილველი 2

filosofiur-Teologiuri
mimomxilveli
Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University
Faculty of Humanities
Educational-Scientific Institute of Philosophy
Philosophical-Theological Reviewer
#2, 2012
ivane javaxiSvilis saxelobis Tbilisis saxelmwifo universiteti
humanitarul mecnierebaTa fakultetis
filosofiis saswavlo-samecniero instituti
filosofiur-Teologiuri
mimomxilveli
#2, 2012
UDC (uak) 1+2-21] (051.2)
f 562
F 52
saredaqcio sabWo: Editorial Board:
nikolai dura (rumineTi) Nicolae Dura (Romania)

lorenco perone (italia) Lorenco Perrone (Italy)
anastasia zaqariaZe Anastasia Zakariadze
demur jalaRonia Demur Jalaghonia
irakli braWuli (r e d a q t o r i) Irakli Brachuli (E d i t o r)
valerian ramiSvili Valerian Ramishvili
samecniero sabWo: Scientific Board:
rismag gordeziani Rismag Gordeziani

darejan TvalTvaZe Darejan Tvaltvadze
Tina doliZe Tina Dolidze
baCana bregvaZe Bachana Bregvadze
damana meliqiSvili Damana Meliqishvili
lela aleqsiZe Lela Aleksidze
maria kornelia barliba (rumineTi) Maria Cornelia Barliba (Romania)
protopresviteri giorgi (zviadaZe) Protopresbyter Giorgi (Zviadadze)
arqimandriti mihaili (stanCiu) (rumineTi) Archimandrite Mihail (Stanciu) (Romania)
dekanozi tarieli (sikinWalaSvili) Archpriest Tariel (Sikinchalashvili)
Tsu gamomcemloba, 2013
ISSN 2233-3568
Sinaarsi
antikuri filosofiuri memkvidreoba da religia

ANTIQUE PHILOSOPHICAL HERITAGE AND RELIGION
lela aleqsiZe
kosmosi rogorc Teatraluri scena plotinis filosofiaSi....................9
LELA ALEXIDZE
Cosmos as a Theatre Stage in Plotinus Philosophy ...........................................................17
VYTIS VALATKA 19
The First Age of Philosophy in Lithuania: The Theory of Universals ................................ 19
vitis valatka
filosofiis pirveli saukune litvaSi:
universaliebis Teoria ..................................................................................... 28
demur jalaRonia
aToneli mamebi, ioane petriwi da gelaTuri azrovnebis
principebis dafuZneba ....................................................................................... 30
DEMUR JALAGHONIA
Athonian Fathers, Ioane Petritsi and the Establishment of Principles
of Gelati Thinking ......................................................................................................... 36
metafizika
me ta fi zika
METAPHY SICS
BURT C. HOPKINS
Prolegomenon to a Critique of Symbolic Reason ............................................................ 39
barT s. hopkinsi
simboluri gonebis kritikis prologomenebi .......................................... 53
valerian ramiSvili
adamianis yofiereba riskis epoqaSi da adamianis Rirsebis
sakiTxi ...................................................................................................................... 61
VALERIAN RAMISHVILI
Being of Human in the Epoch of Risk and the Problem of Human Dignity ...................... 69
5
filosofiur-Teologiuri mimomxilveli, #2, 2012
vaJa niblaZe
filosofia rogorc `meta~ .............................................................................. 71
VAZHA NIBLADZE
Philosophy as Meta ..................................................................................................... 81
irakli braWuli
religiis filosofiis sami paradigma ..........................................................84
IRAKLI BRACHULI
Three Paradigms of the Philosophy of Religion ............................................................... 99
Teologi
Teo logi a
THEOLOGY
mama aleqsi (qSutaSvili)

zeTis kurTxevis saidumlosTan dakavSirebuli zogierTi
kanonikur-liturgikuli sakiTxi.................................................................102
PRIEST ALEXI (KSHUTASHVILI)
Some of the Canonical-Liturgical Issues Connected with the Mystery
of Holy Unction ............................................................................................................110
griver farulava
qarTuli ena, literatura da sarwmunoeba,
miwa-wyali da qarTveli ....................................................................................112
GRIVER PARULAVA
Georgian Language, Literature and Faith, Native Land and the Georgians ......................139
Teologiur-filosofiuri variaciebi Tanamedroveobaze

THEOLOGICAL-PHILOSOPHICAL VARIATIONS ON CONTEMPORARITY
JOE PILOTTA
Rapping Confucius: Chinas Transitional Identities ........................................................ 142
joi pilota
konfucis garepeba: CineTis tradiciuli identobebi .........................167
mamuka doliZe
subieqti kvantur meqanikaSi da avtori Tanamedrove
polifoniur prozaSi ........................................................................................169
6
Sinaarsi
MAMUKA DOLIDZE
The Subject in Quantum Physics and the Author in Modern Polyphonic Fiction ...............175
qeTevan cxvariaSvili
ra darCa hamlets CvenTvis uTqmeli ............................................................179
KETEVAN TSKVARIASHVILI
What Remained Untold by Hamlet ................................................................................187
bioeTika
BIOETHICS
arqimandriti adami (axalaZe)

sulieris primati sekularizebul kulturul sivrceSi.
bioeTikuri ganzomileba .................................................................................190
ARCHIMANDRITE ADAM (AKHALADZE)
Supremacy of spirituality in secularized cultural world.
Bioethical observation ...................................................................................................195
anastasia zaqariaZe
Anno Domini - siberis fenomeni ..........................................................................198
ANASTASIA ZAKARIADZE
Anno Domini-Phenomenon of Oldness ..........................................................................214
axali
axa li Targmanebi
Tar gman eb i
NEW TRANSLATIONS
jibran xalil jibrani

skalpeli da saanesTezio saSualebebi .......................................................216
Cven da Tqven ......................................................................................................... 221
darejan gardavaZe
jibran xalil jibranis ori mxatvrul-filosofiuri esse .............. 224
DAREJAN GARDAVADZE
Two Artistic-Philosophical Essays of Jibran Khalil Jibran .............................................. 227
7
antikuri filosofiuri memkvidreoba
da religia
ANTIQUE PHILOSOPHICAL HERITAGE AND RELIGION
lela aleqsiZe
kosmosi rogorc Teatraluri scena

plotinis filosofiaSi
plotini III 2 eneadaSi (is rigiT 47-ea da misi saxelwodebaa gangebis

Sesaxeb, I) samyaros Teatralur scenas adarebs, adamianebs ki msaxiobebs.
Teatris analogias plotinis SemoqmedebaSi saerTo jamSi farTo adgili ar
ukavia, Tumca III 2 eneadis daaxloebiT Sua nawilidan bolomde mas didi yu-
radReba eqceva da Sinaarsobrivadac Zalian Rrma da farTo datvirTva eni-
Weba: kosmosi plotinisTvis Teatraluri scenaa, kosmiuri drama piesaa,
xolo msaxiobebi da maTi rolebis ganawileba plotinis ontologiis kon-
teqstSi adamianis adgilisa da Taviseburebebis gamoxatulebaa.
plotinisTvis scena aris saxe-simbolo Sualeduri rgoli inteligi-
bilur samyarosa da adamianebs Soris. is erTgvari adgilia, sadac uzenae-
si gangeba RvTaebrivi winaswarWvreta sivrcobriv ganfenilobaSi bediswe-
ris saxiT iSleba da msaxiobTa rolebiT gaTamaSdeba.
plotinis III 2 eneadaSi Teatris analogiaze dakvirveba da Cafiqreba
saSualebas gvaZlevs, gaverkveT da davinaxoT plotinis ontologiis, kos-
mologiisa da anTropologiis urTierTmimarTebisa da kavSiris saintereso
aspeqtebi.
SevecadoT, mokled ganvsazRvroT Teatrisa da scenis roli plotinis
ontologiasa da anTropologiaSi (Segnebulad ar vambob: kosmologiaSi,
radgan Teatri da scena plotinTan swored kosmosis funqcias asrulebs da
mis aRwerasa da masze dakvirvebas kosmologiuri funqcia TavisTavad eni-
Weba). am Temas SevexebiT konkretul filosofiur sakiTxebTan mimarTebaSi,
gansakuTrebiT, gangebis, bedisweris, Tavisuflebis, borotebis da pasuxis-
mgeblobis konteqstSi.
cnebas ontologia aq vxmarob zogadi mniSvnelobiT (arsis, arsebu-
lis Sesaxeb Teoria, romelic moicavs rogorc inteligibilur, aseve kos-
miur da masSi Semaval anTropologiur sferoebs), agreTve ufro viwro
sakuTriv metafizikuri ze-sxeulebrivi sferos mniSvnelobiT. amdenad,
9
Teatri, Tumca ki aris plotinTan materialuri kosmosis simbolo-gansaxi-

ereba (rac platonikosisTvis mudam ufro dabali da naklebad Rirebuli
safexuria inteligibilurTan SedarebiT), magram, amave dros, swored is
adgilia, sadac vlindeba da realizdeba inteligibiluri principebi gar-
kveuli aucileblobiTa da kanonzomierebiT. Teatris, rogorc samyaros
simbolos, aRwera dagvanaxebs materialuri kosmosis (da, masTan erTad, misi
saxe-simbolos Teatris) aucileblobasa da mniSvnelobas plotinis msof-
lxedvisaTvis. kosmosi ar aris inteligibiluris emanaciis, rogorc ubra-
lo daqveiTeba-dacemis, Sedegi: mas Zalian didi mniSvneloba da funqcia
aqvs inteligibiluris realizaciaSi (rac, cxadia, ar niSnavs, rom, ploti-
nis azriT, Tavad inteligibilurs raimeSi sWirdeba kosmosi) da aucileb-
lobiT realizebuli, kosmosis saxiT gaformebul sinamdvileSi Cveni,
adamianebis, isev da isev inteligibilurTan (rac plotinis enaze igivea: Cve-
nive sakuTar TavTan) kavSirisTvis, inteligibilurTan (anu, Cvenive namdvil
arsebasTan, Cvens sakuTar TavTan) ukudabrunebisTvis (petriwis enaze rom
vTqvaT, ukutrfobisTvis).
axla mokled movxazoT, plotinis III 2 eneadis mixedviT, samyaros,
rogorc scenis, suraTi.
plotinis Tanaxmad, msoflio gegma mravalferovnebas iTvaliswinebs.
amitom drama mxolod gmirebisgan ar Sedgeba: masSi meorexarisxovani per-
sonaJebi da kordebaletic monawileobs. solisti ki ar aris mTavari, ara-
med TiToeulma msaxiobma Tavisi individualuri toniT xeli unda Seuwyos
sayovelTao harmonias. rogorc scenaze aris adgili sxvadasxva donis da
mniSvnelobis msaxiobisTvis, aseve universumSia adgili sxvadasxva tipis
ara urTierTTanaswori sulebisTvis. adamiani msoflio dramaSi swor adgi-
las aris dayenebuli, romelic SeiZleba sapatio an naklebad sapatio iyos.
kargi da cudi msaxiobebi Sesabamis rolebs iReben da maT Sesabamisi ad-
gili mieCinebaT. msaxiobs ar SeuZlia cudi TamaSiT piesa gaafuWos (amdenad,
samyaroSi cudi movlenebi kosmiuri gegmis sicudes ar gamoxataven), Tun-
dac Tavad msaxiobi daiTxovon. individisTvis sicude ar niSnavs sayovelTa-
od cuds; sikvdili erTgvarad sxeulis gamocvlaa iseve, rogorc msaxiobi
icvlis kostiums.
bunebrivi kleba kosmiur gegmaSia nagulisxmevi, Tundac mis mier ar
iyos gamowveuli. es ganapirobebs uTanabrobasac. Semoqmedis nebam ki ar
gansazRvra uTanasworoba universumSi, aramed goniT sferoSi ganxorcie-
lebulma bunebrivma safexureobriobam.
poetma libretoSi carieli adgilebi ar unda datovos msaxiobebis
Tavisufali nebis gadasarCenad. libretoSi ar aris carieli adgilebi,
romlebsac msaxiobi TviTon avsebs. adamiani ar aris SemTxveviTi epizodi,
is libretoSia gaTvaliswinebuli. marTalia, adamians gaaCnia Tavisufali
sawyisi sakuTar TavSi, magram individualuri Tavisufleba SezRudulia
10
lela aleqsiZe _ kosmosi rogorc Teatraluri scena plotinis filosofiaSi
universumSi arsebuli simpaTiiT, romlis erT nawils adamianic warmoad-

gens. amave dros, adamiani arc mxolod universumis nawilia, is sakuTrivi
mTelic aris.
Teatraluri scena plotinTan erTgvari analogiaa adgilisa, sadac
kosmiuri drama sruldeba: RvTaebrivi gangeba miwier bediswerad gamovlin-
deba da adamiani / msaxiobi, kosmiuri gegmisa da piradi Tavisuflebis Wi-
dilSi, Tavis rols asrulebs.
am zogadi Sejamebis Semdeg davukvirdeT ramdenime, gangebisa da be-
disweris urTierTmimarTebis TvalsazrisiT, saintereso detals.1
gangebas plotinTan, iseve rogorc saerTod gviandel neoplatoniz-
mSi, udidesi Zala aqvs, magram, me vityodi, es ar niSnavs, rom adamiani mas-
Tan gangebis marionetia (ufro sworad, mas SeiZleba marionetic vuwodoT,
oRond iseTi, romelic sicocxles iZens da TviTonve `TamaSobs). plotinis
sityvebiT rom vTqvaT, `gangeba ise ar unda iyos, rom Cven araferi viyoT.
gangeba rom yvelaferi yofiliyo da mxolod is yofiliyo, is aRarc iqnebo-
da [gangeba]: radgan risi [gangeba] iqneboda? maSin xom mxolod RvTaebrivi
iarsebebda. xolo [gangeba] sxviskenac gamovida, ara imisTvis, rom sxva moes-
po~ (III 3, 9, 1-7).2 aq ìwyeba~ sakuTar TavTan ufro imanenturi gangebis `gas-
xvaeba~ misi proeqcia sul ufro metad sxvaobiT datvirTul bedisweraSi
da materialur sinamdvileSi. es urTulesi Temaa, romelic ìgivesa~ da `sx-
vis~ dialeqtikas gulisxmobs.
mravalferovneba, xarisxobrivi gradacia, romelic samyaroSi arse-
bobs, goniT sferoSi arsebuli diferenciaciis proeqciaa materialur sam-
yaroSi da, amdenad, Cven is uaryofiTad ar unda aRviqvaT. bunebrivi kleba
nagulisxmevia kosmiur gegmaSi, Tundac mis mier ar iyos gamowveuli (III 2, 17,
11). ra iwvevs uTanasworobas? yvelaferi Tanaswori ar aris ara imitom, rom
Semoqmedis nebam ganizraxa ase, aramed es goniT sferoSi arsebuli buneb-
rivi safexureobriobiT aris ganpirobebuli (III 3, 3, 18). faqtobrivad, saqme
gvaqvs ormag gangebasTan: erTi zevidan moqmedebs, meore ki is aris, rome-
lic Tavisufali sawyisis moqmedebas zedasTan akavSirebs. saboloo jamSi,
qvemoT bediswera moqmedebs, zemoT ki gangeba. qvemoT Camosvlisas logosi
araTanasworad nawildeba da qmnis uTanabro sagnebs (III 3, 5, 20). winagangebis
gegma RvTaebrivia (RmerTisTvis sasiamovnoa) (III, 3, 5, 23). cudi qmedebebic
gadaqsovilia winagangebasTan ise, rom misgan ar momdinareoben (III, 3, 5, 47)
[4, 144].
1
plotini damowmebulia saerTaSoriso standartis mixedviT. ZiriTad samuSao
teqstad vxmarobdi [2, 41-116].
2
gangebis, bedisweris da adamianis Tavisuflebis Sesaxeb plotinis VI 8 (39) enea-
dis mixedviT ix. [5, 187-200]. am Temaze didi samecniero literatura arsebobs,
romlis CamoTvla aq SeuZlebelia. mivuTiTebT JorJ lerus Zalian saintere-
so statiaze [6, 292-314], agreTve mis fundamentur gamokvlevaze, plotinis VI 8
eneadis TargmaniTa da komentarebiT [7].
11
plotinis Tanaxmad, mxolod adamians cxovelsac ki ara, aqvs Tavisu-

fali sawyisi (III 3, 4, 1). individualuri Tavisufleba SezRudulia univer-
sumSi arsebuli simpaTiiT, romlis nawilsac adamiani warmoadgens, Tu mas
erTi garkveuli mxridan SevxedavT. magram is, amasTanave, aris ara mxolod
universumis nawili, aramed sakuTrivi mTelic (II 2, 2, 5) [4, 155].
swored im faqtTan dakavSirebiT, rom `kargi~ gangeba am samyaroSi
TiTqos arc mTlad kargi sinamdvilis Tu bedisweris saxiT `proeqtirdeba~,
plotins III 2 eneadis me-11 paragrafSi pirvelad Semoaqvs analogia Teat-
rTan: msoflio gegma, romlis nawili Cveni samyaroa, mTeli Tavisi av-kargiT
(rac mTlianobaSi kargia da mxolod kargi!) Sedarebulia `dramas~: ploti-
nis Tanaxmad, piesa ar iqneboda ukeTesi, Tu masSi mxolod gmirebi imoqme-
debdnen da uaryofiTi personaJebi ar iqnebodnen, radgan piesa sisrules
swored maTi erTobliobiT iZens (III 2, 11, 13-15).
cxovelebi zogjer erTmaneTs Wamen. es SeiZleba ar mogvwondes, mag-
ram, ra aris amaSi cudi? erTis SeWma sxvis gaCenas niSnavs. am TvalsazrisiT
sikvdili erTgvari sxeulis gamocvlaa. is SeiZleba SevadaroT msaxiobis
sikvdils scenaze: mas klaven, is ki kostiums icvlis da axal rolSi gamo-
dis. ase qmnis cxovreba mravalferovan cocxal saTamaSoebs (!). sikvdili ar
aris saSiSi; vinc brZolaSi iRupeba, cotaTi win uswrebs xandazmulobaSi
sikvdils da midis, rom kvlav movides (III 2, 15, 17-39). saerTod, yovelgvari
ubedureba unda aRviqvaT, rogorc speqtakli, rogorc kulisebisa da deko-
raciebis cvla, rogorc msaxiobTa tirili da gancda. cxovrebaSic xom ti-
rilSi Sinagani suli ki ar aris CarTuli, aramed garegani adamianis Crdi-
li, romelic tiris da moTqvams, rogorc es scenaze xdeba. scena ki mTeli
dedamiwaa da adamianebi yvelgan scenas ganasaxiereben. tiris da moTqvams
adamiani, romelsac hgonia, rom mxolod qvena, garegan samyaroSia cxovre-
ba. man ar icis, rom seriozulad tirilic ki TamaSia. seriozulad mxolod
seriozuli (igulisxmeba: goniseuli) sferos aRqma SeiZleba, danarCeni ki
adamianSi mxolod saTamaSoa. da Tu sokratec TamaSobs, is gareSe sokrates
eTamaSeba. isic gasaTvaliswinebelia, rom moTqma da tirili ar aris ubedu-
rebis sabuTi: bavSvebic tirian da moTqvamen imaze, rac sul ar aris cudi (III
2, 15, 40-63).
saerTo jamSi, samyaro erTi gegmis safuZvelze arsebobs da mis mixedviT
warimarTeba, iseve, rogorc dramis gegma aris erTiani, masSi arsebuli mra-
valferovnebis, brZolebisa da dapirispirebebis miuxedavad (III 2, 16, 34-39).
rac ufro metad iSleba grZnobad ganfenilobaSi azri (kosmosis goni-
seuli principi logosi), miT ufro metia dapirispireba da naklebia er-
Tianoba, Tumca, saboloo jamSi, yvelaferi erTianobisken iswrafvis da mas
emsaxureba. logosma TiTqos gaanawila rolebi: erTs erTi Sexvda, sxvas
sxva. yvelas Tavisi adgili aqvs. adamianur dramaSi avtorma rolebi gaanawi-
12
la, adamianebi ki maT asruleben. es hgavs Teatrs, sadac rolebs dramaturgi

anawilebs: erTs is ukeTes da ufro did rols aZlevs, sxvas ki uaress da
usityvos; Tumca, Tavad msaxiobebs, maT Soris pirvel Tu meorexarisxovans,
is ar qmnis; is TiToeuls misTvis Sesaferis sityvas aZlevs da saTanado ad-
gils miuCens. ase ikavebs yvela, cudic da kargic, Sesabamis adgils, Tavis
bunebasa da goniseul gegmasTan (logosTan) TanxmobaSi, adgils, romelic
Tavad airCia (III 2, 17, 1-25).
ras gulisxmobs plotini am sityvebSi: Tavad airCia? roli, romelsac
kosmiuri gegma adamians miuCens, misive, adamianis mierve SerCeul `xasiaTs~
Seesabameba an mas Seewyoba. aq plotini kvlav Teatris analogias iSveliebs,
Tan ise, rom ukve Znelia garCeva Teatrsa da sinamdviles Soris: Semsru-
leblebi xom dramamdec aseTebi iyvnen da [Semdeg] Sevidnen dramaSi (III 2, 17,
26-28). scenaze poeti aZlevs msaxiobs sityvebs, msaxiobma ki amas moqmedeba
unda daumatos, romelsac kargad an cudad warmoadgens. ufro WeSmarit
TxzulebaSi anu, realur cxovrebaSi (romelsac xelovneba mxolod na-
wilobriv Tu mibaZavs), Semsrulebeli sulia. rogorc Semsruleblebi iRe-
ben niRbebs da kostiumebs, ase irgebs suli Tavis beds da esec goniseuli
gegmiT (logosis Tanaxmad) xdeba (III 2, 17, 28-33). suli am beds Seewyoba da,
masTan harmoniaSi mosuli, miesadageba dramasa da mTlian gegmas (III 2, 37-39).
is Tavis arias asrulebs, romelic uSnoa is Tu lamazi sayovelTao har-
monias emsaxureba (III 2, 17, 39-42). xolo Semoqmedi, rogorc msajuli, erT
msaxiobs iwunebs, sxvas ki ajildovebs da mas ufro sapatio rols aniWebs, an
is sulac ufro mSvenier piesaSi Sehyavs (III 2, 17, 45-48). aseve Semodis suli
kosmiur dramaSi da masSi Tavis wils Tavis rols asrulebs, cudad an kar-
gad. amis Sedegad is qebas an gakicxvas imsaxurebs. Tumca, es Semsruleblebi
anu sulebi metis mflobelni arian, vidre Teatris msaxiobebi, radgan maTi
samoqmedo asparezi gacilebiT aRemateba scenas, xolo Semoqmedma isini yve-
lafris ganmgeblad aqcia. isini TviTon gansazRvraven Tavis farTo samoq-
medo asparezze imas, maT pativi egebaT Tu sircxvili, radgan maTi adgili
da roli maTive Tvisebebs Seesabameba. amgvarad, isini, Tavisi kerZo role-
biT, sayovelTao goniseul gegmas (logoss) Seesabamebian, iseve, rogorc
liris yoveli simi sayovelTao harmonias emsaxureba. samyaroSic yvelafe-
ri wesrigSia da yvelaferi kargia, radgan yvela msaxiobi TavisTvis Sesafe-
ris adgilas Tavis rols asrulebs, Tundac es wyvdiadidan da tartarosi-
dan amomavali sastiki xmebi iyos (III 2, 17, 49-66). erTiani harmonia ara erTi,
aramed sxvadasxva, araTanasworxarisxovani xmebis erTobliobiT iqmneba (III
2, 17, 70-74).
yovelive es TiTqos idealur bednierebad gamoiyureba. TiTqos am hap-
py end-iT SeiZleba dasrulebuliyo teqsti.
13
magram plotini ar iqneboda plotini, antikuri epoqis filosofosi

da namdvili platonikosi, am idiliuri suraTis damarRveveli, eWviT savse
kiTxvebi rom ar daesva. saerTo jamSi, isini ori ZiriTadi SekiTxvis saxiT
SeiZleba gamovxatoT:
1. ramdenad Tavisufalni arian msaxiobebi, anu ramdenad Tavisufalni
varT Cven, adamianebi? 2. saidan gaCnda boroteba goniseuli gegmidan Tu
sulebidan?
pirvel SekiTxvas plotini lokalur sasceno konteqstSi svams: cvli-
an Tu ara msaxiobebi rolebs? vfiqrob, misi pasuxi ufro survilia, vidre
ganmarteba: plotinis Tanaxmad, msaxiobTa mier avtoris mier dadgenili ro-
lebisa da teqstebis cvlileba speqtaklis msvlelobaSi ar iqneboda kargi;
TiTqosda piesa dausrulebeli yofiliyo da avtors Tavisufali adgilebi
daetovebinos amosavsebad; magram, aseT SemTxvevaSi msaxiobebi msaxiobebi
ki aRar iqnebodnen, aramed raRac zomiT Tanaavtorebad iqceodnen (III 2, 18,
5-12). aq, albaT, gansakuTrebiT naTlad Cans cxovrebisa da Teatrisadmic
Cveni damokidebulebis gansxvaveba plotinisgan: Cven sul ar gagvikvirdeba
da, SeiZleba, piriqiT, mogvewonos kidec speqtaklis msvlelobaSi libretos
improvizebuli cvlileba. metic: CvenTvis isic ki ar aris, albaT, warmoud-
geneli, rom siuJetis moulodnelma cvlilebam sinamdvile Secvalos.
plotinis azriT, yvela Sedegi, maT Soris isic, rac borotebas mos-
devs, TavisTavad goniseuli principia, anu isic, Taviseburad, logosiT
aris ganpirobebuli (III 2, 18, 13-15). ufro dawvrilebiT pasuxs adamianis Ta-
visuflebis (da, masTan erTad, sicudis) SeTavsebadobaze RvTaebrivi gan-
gebis yovlisSemZleobasTan plotini am eneadaSi ar iZleva.
pirvel kiTxvaze arc mTlad damajereblad gacemuli pasuxidan, rom-
lis Tanaxmad goniseuli gegma sulTa moqmedebas iTvaliswinebs, gamomdina-
reobs meore kiTxva, romelic borotebis warmomavlobas exeba: Tu marTlac
gegmiT aris ZiriTadad yvelaferi gansazRvruli, maSin gamodis, sulebi ar
yofilan pasuxismgebelni arc cudi da arc kargi saqcielisTvis? (III 2, 18, 18-
19). am SekiTxvas da motivebs, romelmac is ganapiroba, plotini kidev ufro
Rrma eWvebamde mihyavs: meore mxriv, Tu goniseul princips (logoss) cudis-
Tvis pasuxismgeblad ar miviCnevT, gana amiT mas sikeTisTvis pasuxisgebasac
ar CamovarTmevT? (III 2, 18, 20-21) da Tu kosmiuri gegma TavisTavad winaswar
Seicavs rogorc kargs, aseve cuds, xolo msaxiobebi am gegmis nawilebi arian
da yvelaferi gegmiT aris winaswar gansazRvruli, maSin Cndeba kiTxva: ris-
Tvis Seiqmna am gegmiT boroteba? (III 2, 21-26). garda amisa, nuTu RvTaebrivi
sulebic ki arafers warmoadgenen universumSi da yvela suli mxolod lo-
gosis nawilia? (III 2, 18, 26-29).
am SekiTxvebze pasuxs plotini III 2 eneadaSi ar iZleva. is SekiTxviT
mTavrdeba da aq masze msjeloba Cvenc ase davamTavroT.
14
plotinTan Teatrze, piesaze, dramasa da msaxiobze, rogorc realuri

adamianis prototipze, fiqri pasternakis `hamlets~ maxsenebs.3 adamianis,
rogorc msaxiobis, cxovrebis, rogorc speqtaklis da samyaros, rogorc
Teatris, gagebis TvalsazrisiT maT Soris msgavsebaa: orivesTan samyaro
scenaa, cxovreba speqtakli anu Teatraluri piesaa, adamiani msaxiobia
da piriqiT. orive SemTxvevaSi uzenaesi xeliT seriozuli drama TamaSde-
ba; orivegan igrZnoba bedisweris Zala. orive iRebs am Zalas da, marTalia,
sxvadasxva ganwyobiT, magram mainc èTanxmeba~ mas. swored aq aris sagrZnobi
gansxvaveba am or damokidebulebas Soris cxovrebis, sinamdvilis, adamia-
nis, Teatris, dramisa da, rac mTavaria, bedisweris mimarT: pasternakis ham-
leti (da, albaT, Seqspiris hamletic) mas emorCileba, magram es morCileba
aris ufro tragikuli Tanxmoba imaze, rac unda moxdes da piradad mas, ham-
lets mouvides; plotinis azriT ki adamiani, iqneba is msaxiobi Tu persona-
Ji, TiTqos bevrad ufro optimisturad da xalisiT unda uyurebdes mosax-
dens. SegrZneba imisa, rom CvenTvis cudic sayovelTao kosmiurobis nawilia
da, amdenad, Taviseburad kargia, radgan isic RvTaebrivi, goniseuli gange-
bis Taviseburi gamovlenaa amqveynad, rogorc Cans, antikurobaSi gvian-
delSic ki, plotinis dros mainc bevrad Zlieri iyo (amas neoplatonuri
filosofiis Sinaarsic ganapirobebda), vidre Seqspiris da pasternakis epo-
qebSi. amitom subieqturi tkivili da gancda adamianisa plotinis `TeatrSi~
bevrad sustia (is `niRabia~!) an, ufro sworad, Segnebulad unda iyos susti;
metic, is erTgvar sixaruladac unda gardaiqmnas, roca adamiani dainaxavs,
rom Tavad is nawilia mTelisa; mTels xom yovelTvis upiratesoba aqvs. plo-
tinisTvis cudic saerTo wesrigis nawilia da raRac dadebiTi masac aqvs.
magram, gana amas hamleti (Seqspirisa) an hamleti / Jivago (pasternakisa) ver
xedavdnen? ra Tqma unda, xedavdnen. magram maTTvis es sakmarisi piroba ar
iyo imisTvis, rom subieqturi gancda gadaelaxaT da sakuTari da sazogado
ubedurebis fonze kosmiuri wesrigis arsebobis rwmeniT subieqturad ga-
xarebac SeZlebodaT. metic: SeiZleba iTqvas, rom maTTan subieqturi gan-
cda maTTvis axali ara mxolod subieqturi, aramed kosmiuri dramis mo-
maswavebelic ki iyo an SeiZleba aseTi gamxdariyo... plotinTan ki jer kidev
moqmedebda antikuri harmoniulobis wesi: rac saerTod kargia, Tu adamiani
amas daukvirdeba da gaiazrebs, misTvis TiTqosda verc subieqturad iqneba
cudi da mZime.
3
. ./ ,/ -
, / . / /
./ , A O, / . /
/ / , /
. / , / ./ ,
. / - . pasternaki, `hamleti~, `Jivagos
leqsebidan~.
15
da kidev erTi saintereso gansxvaveba: plotinisTvis arc cxovreba da

arc misi gamomxatveli speqtakli ar yofila `farisevloba~. `TamaSi cxov-
rebaSi~ anu `TamaSi TamaSSi~ (ramdenadac cxovreba TamaSia) adamianTa
farisevloba, mliqvneloba, siyalbe mas, Seqspirsa da pasternakTan Seda-
rebiT, naklebad aRelvebda. cxovreba, rogorc Teatri, misTvis realoba
iyo SesaZloa, arasruli, magram mainc anarekli da materialuri gamoxa-
tuleba RvTaebrivi gangebis da inteligibiluri sinamdvilisa. mxolod am
mimarTebis TvalsazrisiT iyo cxovreba plotinisTvis seriozulad misaRe-
bi. sxva mxriv, am bed-ukuRmarTobis ara-namdvilobis gamo, mis gamo gancda
ar Rirda.
literatura:
wyaroebi:
1. Plotini Opera I, ed. P. Henry et E.-R. Schwyzer, Paris, Bruxelles 1951

2. Plotins Schriften. Hrsg. R.Beutler und W. Theiler. bersetzt von R. Harder. Band Va.
Darmstadt, Hamburg 1960
3. Plotins Schriften. Hrsg. R.Beutler und W. Theiler. bersetzt von R. Harder. Band Vb.
Darmstadt, Hamburg 1960
4. Plotins Schriften. Hrsg. R.Beutler und W. Theiler. bersetzt von R. Harder. Band VI.
Indices verbunden mit einem berblick ber Plotins Philosophie und Lehrweise. Unter
Mitwirkung von G. ODaly. Darmstadt, Hamburg 1971
meoradi literatura:
5. l. aleqsiZe. ioane petriwi da antikuri filosofia. Tbilisi 2008
6. G. Leroux. Human Freedom in the Thought of Plotinus. In: The Cambridge Companion to
Plotinus. Ed. L. P. Gerson. Cambridge 1996, pp. 292-314
7. G. Leroux. Plotin. Trait sur la libert et la volont de lUn [Ennade VI, 8 (39).
Introduction, texte grec traduction et commentaire. Paris 1990.
16
LELA ALEXIDZE
Cosmos as a Theatre Stage in Plotinus Philosophy
Plotinus in his Ennead III 2 [47] (On the Providence, part I) compares the world with the
stage of a theatre and people with actors. According to Plotinus, the cosmic drama is like a the-
atrical play and the actors with their parts are like us, people, with our duties and destiny in the
world.
Thus, for Plotinus, the stage is a symbol of the corporeal universe, i.e. of the world percei-
ved by senses (kosmos aisthetos). At the same time, it is an image and reflection of the intelligible
world. The stage has a function of a mediator between the divine, intelligible world, on the one
hand, and us, people (here, below), on the other. It is the place, area, where the supreme pro-
vidence - the highest, divine pronoia takes its shape and develops as Fate (which is a lower kind
of Providence) in the spatial and historical dimensions of the physical world. Thus, the actors on
the stage are the agents who contribute to the realization of the divine Providence in the form of
the Fate in our material world.
The aim of the paper is to analyze the image of the theater and of the stage in it as the
symbols of the physical cosmos in the context of the main branches of Plotinus philosophy
such as ontology, cosmology, and anthropology. We focus our attention on the image of the stage
as a topological center and place where these three above-mentioned branches cross each
other and show their interrelationship as a result of the projection of the rational formative prin-
ciple (logos) in the world perceived by the senses. The main questions we discuss in the paper
are as follows: How do human freedom, divine Providence and Fate correspond to one another?
What kind of role does a man as an actor, who already has a certain part in the play, on the one
hand, and the same man as a free person, on the other, play in the cosmic drama in which we are
all involved as actors?
Another issue discussed in the paper is the meaning and importance of the material world
taken as a whole in Plotinus world-view: is it just an inferior degree of emanation of the in-
telligible reality and the negative result of the outflowing or outshining of the formative
principle into the material plurality? Or, on the contrary, does Plotinus esteem this process of
production and projection of the rational principle positively? I think that in the Ennead we are
discussing, our material world has a great importance and meaning for the whole process of ema-
nation and realization of the rational formative principle, though this does not mean that in Ploti-
nus opinion, intelligible principle (Intellect as hypostasis) has any need of the material cosmos.
This means that our world symbolizing the stage is a necessary result of the essential activity of
the higher, intelligible principles, and we, people, like actors, already have our roles prescribed by
the rational principle. Does this mean that we, people, are not free? Plotinus does not think so. His
famous words are as follows: Providence ought not to exist in such a way as to make us nothing
(Enn. III 2, 9, 1-4, transl. by A.H. Armstrong). Where does the difference between men (between
17
good and bad characters, acts, etc.) start? Plotinus supposes that the cause of this difference lies
in the highest intelligible world itself: the Intellect is many though this kind of plurality and di-
versity exists in unity. The fact of the existence of Providence means in Plotinus opinion the ne-
cessity of existence of something other, which is not providence: If everything was providence
and nothing but providence, then providence would not exist; for what would it have to provide
for? (Enn. II, 2, 9, 1-4, transl. by A.H. Armstrong). Thus, the providence provides for others and
at this point of emanation of the Intellect, the otherness starts. Therefore, a man (at least, his best
part) is not a toy in Gods hand (cf. Plato, Legg. 803 c). Though he has already got his role in
this earthly life, he still is, he can and must be active. Generally, activity is a very important con-
cept for understanding the causes and modes of alteration, change, etc. in Plotinus philosophy.
Man is like an actor playing the role already written by the author. Nevertheless, as a man and as
an actor, he is still active in his role. Life and stage are places where he fulfills his freedom: So
the activity of life is an artistic activity, like the way in which one who is dancing is moved, for
the dancer himself is like the life, which is artistic in this way his art moves him, and moves in
such a way that the actual life is somehow of this [artistic] kind (III 2, 16, 23-24, transl. by A.H.
Armstrong). It is evident that in Plotinus opinion the world as a whole and life as a whole rema-
in changeless in spite of all diversities and oppositions between the characters. Nevertheless, the
activity of the actors plays, to my mind, a very important role in Plotinus understanding of the
permanent process of formation and design of life as a whole in our world.
18
VYTIS VALATKA
The First Age of Philosophy in Lithuania:

The Theory of Universals
Similar to the position of Francisco Suarez, it would rather be regarded

as an intermediate model between moderate realism and conceptualism. As for
the epistemological level of the above mentioned theory, it varies from Thomistic
to Ockhamistic interpretation.
This article analyses the theory of universals involved in scholastic
philosophy in Lithuania of the 16th century. The author of the article focuses on
the ontological and epistemological levels of that theory. Namely, interpretations
of universals nature and its relation to human cognition are scrutinized. The
analysis comes to a conclusion that the ontological level of the above mentioned
theory cannot be strictly attributed to any classical variant of realism and
nominalism.
Introduction
Lithuania and Georgia are the nations of rich philosophical tradition. Nevertheless, Georgian
philosophy is not sufficiently presented in Lithuania. It is probably Merab Mamardashvili alone,
who is read by or, at least, known to Lithuanian philosophical, humanitarian and cultural public.
Moreover, quite a big part of students of philosophy in Lithuania does not even know the name
of the afore-mentioned grandee of Georgian philosophy. As for the knowledge of Lithuanian
philosophy among Georgian philosophers and humanitarians, the situation is analogous.
Therefore, Georgian and Lithuanian philosophical traditions need to be revealed to each other.
This article, dealing with a certain aspect of the very beginning of philosophy in Lithuania, is
just a humble contribution to the huge task of the mentioned revelation.
Philosophy in Lithuania began to be taught at least in 1507. It was in the particular school
of Vilnius Dominican Monastery where the action took place. Nevertheless, the development
of this science up to the European level of that time has to be ascribed to Jesuit Order. In 1570,
the latter founded the academic gymnasium college in Vilnius, which nine years later was
reorganized into Academy, or University, with faculties of philosophy and theology. It was from
the very beginning that scholastic philosophy (namely, logic, philosophy of nature, metaphysics
and ethics) of high standard was lectured within the walls of this university. Such a standard
can be proved by a course on logic delivered in Vilnius University in 1586/1587 by Professor
Marcin miglecki (Martinus Smiglecius), one of the most prominent scholastic philosophers
in Lithuania (Smiglecius 1987). It was exactly this course that served as a basis for the famous
19
Logic of miglecki. The latter, issued in Ingolstat in 1618 and reissued in Oxford in 1634,
1638 and 1658, spread in European catholic and protestant universities of that time.
The above-mentioned lectures on logic of miglecki will make the main subject of this
article. The article will also investigate the other hitherto extant sources of scholastic logic in
Lithuania in the 16th century. These sources consist of the lectures on logic delivered in Vilnius
University in 1596 by Professor Diego Ortiz (Iacob Ortizius) and philosophical theses prepared
by students of Vilnius Jesuit College under the guidance of Professor Pedro Viana (Petrus Viana)
in 1578. The article will analyze theory of universals (universalia, sing. universale) included
in the mentioned texts. Namely, ontological and epistemological levels of this theory will be
scrutinized. At the end of the article some words will be said about the logical level, which can
be lightly deduced from the ontological one.
It has to be observed that researches on universals theory within philosophy in Lithuania
of the 16th century still remain insufficiently explored. Among the historians of Polish philosophy
it is Roman Darowski who briefly surveyed its ontological level (Darowski 1994). The famous
Lithuanian philosopher Romanas Plekaitis in his first volume of the history of Lithuanian
philosophy presents the ontological level of universals conceptions involved in the afore
mentioned sources (Plekaitis 2004). Plekaitis analyses the whole heritage of scholastic logic
in Lithuania without focusing on any particular period or subject. Also the present writer has
published three separate articles investigating the ontological (Valatka 2005), epistemological
(Valatka 2006) and logical (Valatka 2007) levels of universals theory included in the Lithuanian
philosophy of the 16th century. This article is a certain presentation, synthesis and generalization
in English of the results attained in those 3 articles.
The problem of universals in classic and second scholasticism
The problem of universals inherited from antique philosophy and patristics was one of
the main problems of scholastic logic. The latter dealt with three operations of human intellect:
apprehension, proposition and discourse. Universal was considered an object of the first
intellective operation. Inquiry into universals embraced three fundamental levels: ontological,
epistemological and logical. The epistemological level concentrated on the relation between
universal and human cognition. Logical level analyzed properties of universal that is eternity,
immateriality, predictability, etc. Nevertheless, the status of the essential level was ascribed to
the ontological one, which served as a basis for the rest. This fundamental level investigated
universals nature and its relation to multitude of particular things. The results of such an
investigation determined four principal trends in universals theory. These were extreme and
moderate forms of realism, having honored universals with status of real entities (entia realia),
opposed by extreme nominalism and conceptualism both regarding universal as mere construct
of human intellect (ens rationis). Extreme realism maintained universals to exist irrespectively
from individual things (ante res) whereas moderate realism asserted the existence of universals
also within these things. Conceptualism, in turn, regarded universal as a common concept, while
extreme nominalism identified it with the common term having no correspondent in reality.
20
vitis valatka _ filosofiis pirveli saukune litvaSi: universaliebis Teoria
Disputes on the nature of universal did not abate in the so-called second scholasticism
either, which lasted from the 16th to the 18th century. True, this scholasticism basically abandoned
radical forms of nominalism and realism, dwelling on the controversy of moderate realism
and conceptualism. On the other hand, second scholasticism popularized one more variant of
universals theory. We could define it as an intermediate version between moderate realism
and conceptualism having connected particular elements of both above mentioned trends. As
moderate realism, such an eclectic position asserted existence of universals in the multitude of
individual things. On the other hand, this existence was affirmed absolutely impossible without
the activity of human intellect. That is, universal natures exist in rebus just insofar as intellect
abstracts them from individuating conditions of particular things and cognizes beyond the frame
of individuality. The most prominent adherent of that intermediate position was Francisco Suarez
(Franciscus Suaresius), one of the greatest philosophers of the second stage of scholasticism.
According to him, universal unity of nature insofar as it is universal neither possesses reality
nor inheres in things inasmuch as they really exist and precede every operation of intellect
(Suarez 1614: disputation 6, section 2, subsection 13; p. 133)
The epistemological level of universals theory has also given rise to an ardent scholastic
quarrel. The participants of this quarrel sought an answer to the question: How does human
intellect abstract universal from particular things? Thomistic answer to this question based itself
on the conception of sensible and intelligible species. Meanwhile, adherents of Ockhamistic
position rejected the mediation of the above mentioned species in the process of abstraction of
universal. According to them, human senses directly cognize individual things. Thereupon data
of this sense perception serve as a basis for intellective abstraction of universal the common
concept of similar particularities.
The ontological level of universals theory. Is universal given in the multitude

of things?
In which way was the ontological level of universals theory interpreted in the scholastic
logic of Lithuania in the 16th century? Namely, how did the authors of the mentioned logic
explain the very nature of universal? According to miglecki (1987: fascicle [further f.] 1,
p. 24), it is common conception among all [philosophers] that universal is a thing common to
multitude [of things], or that, which being one nevertheless sustains relation to multitude. Ortiz
defined universal in analogical way. In his words, universal in general sense is what is common
to multitude (Ortizius 15961597: leaf [further l.] 49). Thus, universal is a nature inseparable
from the multitude of particular things and unifying this multitude.
miglecki and Ortiz marked out two essential modes, or ways of being, of universal.
These are universal in being (universale in essendo) and predicative universal (universale in
praedicando). The former was defined as a unity common to the elements of a certain multitude
and existing within these elements. Meanwhile, predicative universal was regarded as a unity
being attributed to the multitude because of its existence in such a multitude. It is evident that
21
these modes of universal do not essentially differ from one another the same universal nature
exists within particularities and bears a status of their predicate (Smiglecius 1987: f. 1, p. 25;
Ortizius 15961597, l. 50). Thus universale in essendo and universale in praedicando are just two
separate sides of the same generality. Therefore, hereafter in this article we will not distinguish
between these modes and talk straight about universal as general nature.
Did scholiasts of Vilnius consider this universal a real entity? It might seem at first sight
that miglecki and Ortiz followed the tradition of realism. Namely, they rejected a fundamental
thesis of nominalists that individual things alone posses real existence. According to miglecki
(1987: f. 1, p. 30), universal in being is given in the nature of things. For it is evident that
particular things of the universe are not totally different they differ in certain aspects but in the
other aspects they correspond to one another. Such a correspondence is determined exactly by
universals general natures and essences of things. For example, resemblance of human beings
is determined by universal human nature, namely, being a rational animal. Ortiz ratiocinates
analogically. In his opinion, natures on the same basis suiting multitude are universal, but
natures suiting multitude on the same basis are given [in natural order of things], hence universal
natures are given (Ortizius 15961597: l. 50).
Does universal exist ante res?
So universal exists in individual things as the whole of their essential attributes.

Consequently, it might seem that miglecki and Ortiz belonged to the camp of moderate realists.
True, they did not stick to Thomistic moderate realism, which asserted the ternary existence of
universal: a) in Gods Mind, b) in particular things, c) in human intellect. These Jesuit thinkers
were considerably closer to Aristotelian moderate realism negating the existence of universals
ante res. They univocally rejected a Platonic Augustinian position, which ascribed status of
universals to eternal ideas, or prototypes of things, consisting in divine intellect. According to
miglecki (1987: f. 1, p. 32), as universals are essences of things, they are not separated from
these things. Ortiz (15961597: l. 61) reasons in a similar way: essences of things cannot
exist beyond these things, for nothing is as intrinsic [to thing] as essence... Whereas prototypes
of Divine Mind are separate from things. Neither God himself nor the content of his intellect
possesses immediate existence within things. In such a case the whole creation of God was
divine, still God is one and only. Thus, divine idea cannot be the universal nature of things. On
the other hand, universal is predicated of its particular things as what they are (Smiglecius
1987: f. 1, p. 32). Yet such predicability is not characteristic of divine prototypes. For it is false
to affirm that Peter is an idea of human being lying in Gods Mind. In the meantime, proposition
Peter is a human being raises no doubts this proposition attributes to Peter general human
nature residing in all human beings as their essence. Thus, human nature in Peter and human idea
within Gods Intellect are not identical objects human prototype, not containing the whole of
Peters essential attributes, cannot be predicated of Peter.
22
Is universal a concept of human intellect?
So miglecki and Ortiz rejected the existence of universal before particular things in
the shape of eternal idea. Nevertheless, it would be false to assert that these scholiasts adhered
to Aristotelian moderate realism. Such realism announced the existence of universals not
only within but also beyond individual things. The status of universals existing post res was
acknowledged to common concepts (notiones, conceptiones) of human intellect. Meanwhile,
Jesuits of Vilnius refused to regard these concepts as universals. According to them, common
concepts are mere creations of human intellect possessing no existence beyond its frames. In the
meantime, universal is not a pure construct of reason. It must be considered intellects object
a nature, which intellect abstracts from particular things, and on the basis of which creates
their common concept; that is image of such a nature. So universal may be affirmed to exist
after things merely as nature abstracted from them. Therefore, a common concept cannot be
universale in essendo. Nor is it a predicative universal. For, as miglecki (1987: f. 1, p. 34)
maintains, Through predication intellect attributes to [particular] things what it conceives to
exist within them, but it is not its concept but the thing itself that intellect conceives as existing
within things. Therefore, not a concept but the thing conceived by intellect is what is predicated
of [particular things]. Such a conceived object is the very nature of individual things having
been separated by intellect from any individuating factors. The example of this nature may be
human being, existing in Peter, Paul and Thaddeus as a rational animal.
Ortizs course delivers an analogical view. In his opinion, the definition of universal suits
not a common term, or concept, but the thing itself, for the thing alone exists in a multitude and
is predicated on it (Ortizius 15961597: l. 53). Such a thing is identified with common nature of
particular objects.
How does universal exist in rebus? Specific and formal unity
Thus, miglecki and Ortiz did not take the concept of intellect for universal. The latter
was regarded as common nature, or essence, of individual things. Now Jesuits of Vilnius had to
find an answer to the final question. How does universal exist within particular things? In other
words, does it possess real or only mental existence?
As it has already been mentioned, universal was interpreted as one and the same nature,
existing in multitude of things. According to miglecki (1987: f. 1, p. 35), there is no doubt
that nature really exists in multitude, still it is questionable whether it really exists as one in
multitude. miglecki presents two variants of unity of nature, which exists in multitude. The
former is entitled as specific unity (unitas specifica). Nature, possessing this kind of unity,
remains one and the same in every element of multitude just as species within its individuals.
The second variant bears a name of formal unity (unitas formalis). Nature, possessing such a
unity, varies in every element of multitude. Nevertheless, this nature sustains the same formal
and essential predicates (praedicata formalia et quidditativa), that is, the same aggregate of
23
essential properties. Ortiz marks out the same kinds of unity. True, in his version they acquire
a little bit different titles. Namely, a specific unity of miglecki is substituted by the formal
positive unity (unitas formalis positiva). Meanwhile, formal unity is entitled as formal negative
unity (unitas formalis negativa).
Which of these unities is characteristic of the nature existing in a multitude of particular
things? According to Jesuits of Vilnius, this nature does not possess specific unity. For, nature
is always individual within particular things it is deduced that nature, existing in things, is
really inseparable from singularity because it is really connected with singularity (Smiglecius
1987: f. 1, p. 36). Nature within particular thing is inseparable from the latters individual
difference (differentia individualis), which makes such a nature an individual entity. Thus, the
nature existing in particular things cannot be one and the same. This means that universal does
not possess real existence in multitude nature, existing in a multitude of particular things, for
example, human nature in Socrates and Plato, is not actually and formally universal (Ortizius
15961597: l. 59). Namely, human natures inherent in Socrates and Plato differ in their subjects,
occupied places and executed operations; moreover, these natures come into existence and
disappear in different ways (Ortizius 15961597: l. 59).
Thus nature, existing in a multitude, is individual and not universal. On the other hand,
universal is prior to an action of human intellect. Nevertheless, such priority does not make
universal nature a real entity. For universal is prior to passive intellect (intellectus possibilis)
alone. The same thing cannot be said about active intellect (intellectus agens). The latter abstracts
universal nature from particular things by creating its intellective species (species intelligibilis),
that is, a certain image of that nature. Such intellective species actuates passive intellect. The
latter, resting on image of abstracted nature, cognizes this nature and produces its concept.
Hence universal cannot be regarded as entity independent from intellect, that is, entity
possessing real existence in particular things. Universal nature is posterior to active intellect,
which abstracts it from the things individual difference that provides nature with particularity.
According to miglecki (1987: f. 1, p. 39), with respect to active intellect, which produces
intellective species, [universal] nature is a completing object, posterior to that intellect Ortiz
(15961597: l. 67) holds the same position: natures are not universal unless they are abstracted
by intellect. Thus, universals really move passive intellect. Yet, they do not exist in particular
things before abstracting operation of active intellect.
So, universal lacks real existence. No nature can exist as one and the same in particular
things before abstracting an action of active intellect. No nature, existing in a multitude, possesses
specific unity. This kind of nature disposes of formal unity alone separate individuals of such
a nature sustain the same essential features. In other words, the nature, existing in a multitude,
is the one just according to its essential predicates. Therefore, human nature that exists in Peter
does not really differ in essential and formal attributes from human nature that exists in Paul since
whatever is included in Peters nature is also included in Pauls nature, and one nature does not
possess any formal predicate, in which it would differ from another nature (Smiglecius 1987: f.
1, p. 40). Namely, human nature of both Peter and Paul is in all essentials animal rationale.
24
Thus, the nature existing in a multitude possesses formal unity. According to Ortiz (1596
1597: l. 66), it is a real unity, that is, the unity existing beyond human intellect. On the other hand,
such unity cannot be regarded as a unity in the literal sense of this word. For, even sustaining
essential predicates, nature does not exist as one and the same in every element of multitude.
How does universal exist in rebus? Objective being within intellect
So, miglecki and Ortiz do not consider universal a real being. Universal nature cannot
be separated from the operation of active intellect; consequently, it is only a mental being (ens
rationis). What status does universal acquire in intellect? According to miglecki, within intellect
nature may exist in two ways: subjectively and objectively. Nature that possesses subjective
existence in human intellect is not the nature in the full sense of this word. It is just an image,
representation, common concept of nature, conceived by passive intellect. In the meantime, the
nature possessing objective existence in intellect is exactly a universal. It has to be observed that
Jesuits of Vilnius did not use a concept of objectivity in contemporary sense. Namely, they have
not identified objectivity with reality, veracity or truthfulness. Speaking about nature, which
exists objectively within intellect, they only meant the object of the latter, that is, nature as much
as it is conceived by intellect. This nature cannot be regarded as any image or representation.
It is nature of particular things itself, which active intellect abstracts from them, and which
passive intellect afterwards cognizes, also creating its representation. It is nature that active
intellect liberates from individual differences of particular things. Such a nature, devoid of any
individuality, exactly exists within things as one and the same; moreover, it is predicated on
them as their essence. Therefore, this nature is precisely a universal. So, as miglecki (1987:
f. 1, p. 47) asserts, universal is not a thing existing beyond intellect, nor is it a thing existing
subjectively within intellect; hence it will be a thing possessing objective existence in intellect.
Ortiz (15961597: l. 69) holds the same position. According to him, universals exist objectively
within intellect.
It has to be stressed that nature, bearing objective existence in intellect, is by no means a
thing excogitated by intellect (res conficta ab intellectu). Fictions of human reason, for example,
centaurs, sphinxes, chimeras, etc., have no equivalents in reality. Meanwhile, universal existing
objectively within intellect is the nature itself without particularizing conditions (Smiglecius
1987: f. 1, p. 44). In other words, universal is a nature existing in particular things, which intellect
abstracts from individuating factors and makes one and the same in every thing. Ortiz (1596
1597: l. 69.) delivers an analogical view: I respond that universals are natures, naturally
existing in particular things themselves, yet abstracted from the latter by intellect.
Digression from moderate realism
Resting on aforesaid things, we may affirm that miglecki and Ortiz digressed from
Aristotelian moderate realism. They did not ascribe the status of universal to a common concept,
25
regarding the latter only as image of universal. True, these Jesuits asserted universal to exist
within particular things as their essence. Nevertheless, neither miglecki nor Ortiz recognized
real existence of universals in multitude. In their opinion, universal exists in things only because
of intellect Universals are said to exist in both thing and intellect, because they are suited
for thing insofar as it is an object of intellect (Smiglecius 1987: f. 1, p. 60).
Similar interpretation of universals existence was also presented by P. Viana. The only
thesis of his students, devoted to universals, asserts: Having rejected figment of Plato and the
others, we consider together with Aristotle and the other most learned [men] that universals exist
in things, and that they are not only vocables and concepts but also certain natures, signified by
concepts and prescinded from particular things only by discourse of intellect; and no nature can be
considered universal before operation of intellect (Viana 1578: thesis 58). Thus, like miglecki
and Ortiz, Viana affirmed that universal exists in multitude just as much as it is conceived by
human intellect. On the other hand, differently from the above mentioned scholiasts, Viana also
attributed the status of universals to common terms and concepts. So, at this point he was a little
bit closer to moderate realism than miglecki and Ortiz.
However, the interpretation of the ontological level of universals theory, proper to
above mentioned authors, cannot be strictly ascribed to any of classical variants of realism
and nominalism. Such an interpretation, similar to that of Francisco Suarez, would rather be
regarded as an intermediate model between moderate realism and conceptualism. Like moderate
realists, miglecki, Viana and Ortiz maintained that universals are given in the very nature of
individual things. But, contrary to moderate realism, they refused to acknowledge real existence
of universals. In their opinion, universal nature exists in rebus just as much as it is cognized
by intellect. On the other hand, together with conceptualists, scholiasts of Vilnius affirmed the
existence of universals in human intellect. But, differently from conceptualism, these authors,
with the exception of Viana alone, did not attribute the status of universal to a common concept.
Universal was regarded as the very nature of real things, which our intellect abstracts from
particularizing conditions and cognizes beyond the frame of individuality.
Epistemological and logical levels of universals theory
The epistemological level of universals theory dealt with a question: How does human
intellect abstract universal? miglecki gave a Thomistic answer to this question. According to
him, the process of abstraction of universal includes both sense perception and intellect, which,
in conformity with Aristotelian tradition, is divided into active and passive ones. First of all,
particular things send their partial images sensible species to five external senses. These
fragmentary images are transferred to internal senses (i. e., common sense and phantasy), which
create phantasmata complete images of the afore mentioned particularities (for example,
complete images of individual human beings Peter, John and Andrew are composed). Then
comes the turn of active intellect (intellectus agens) in phantasy, out of object of phantasy,
which is called phantasm, an intelligible species is produced by active intellect (Smiglecius
26
1987: f. 1, p. 43). That is, active intellect, resting on similar phantasmata of similar individual
things, produces their common image the intelligible species. The creation of this image is
identical to the abstraction of universal. For, the common image of similar things represents their
nature without individuating and particularizing conditions, thus making that nature universal.
Hence nature, inasmuch as it is in active intellect, is both abstracted and universal (Smiglecius
1987: f. 1, p. 46).
So it is active intellect that abstracts universal. Such an action turns on the passive intellect
(intellectus possibilis). Leaning on intelligible species, this intellect cognizes universal itself,
herewith creating its common concept.
Thereby miglecki presented Thomistic interpretation of the epistemological level of
universals theory. A similar position is found in the course of Ortiz. As, like Thomists, this
scholiast maintained that active intellect needs intelligible species to abstract universal from
particular things. Nevertheless, contrary to Thomistic position, Ortiz denied participation of
sensible species in the abstraction of universal, accepting in this aspect Ockhamistic point of
view. According to him, external senses directly cognize particular things and, resting on the
data of this sense perception, internal senses create phantasmata of cognized things. So, sensible
species allegedly sent to external senses by things themselves are mere fiction of Democritus
and his followers (Ortizius 15961597: l. 245).
At the end of the article some words must be said about the logical level of universals
theory, which investigated the properties (propria) of universal as such. The representatives
of scholastic logic in Lithuania of the 16th century presented traditional interpretation of that
level. They attributed to universal traditional scholastic propria. That is, universal was regarded
as immaterial and incorruptible nature predicable of its individuals as well as an object of
sciences.
Conclusions
The authors of Philosophy in Lithuania in the 16th Century M. miglecki, P. Viana

and D. Ortiz proposed the interpretation of the ontological level of universals theory, which
cannot be strictly attributed to any classical form of realism and nominalism. This interpretation,
similar to that of Francisco Suarez, would rather be regarded as an intermediate position between
moderate realism and conceptualism.
miglecki presented Thomistic interpretation of the epistemological level of universals
theory, based on the conception of sensible and intelligible species and distinction between
active and passive intellect. Meanwhile, the interpretation presented by Ortiz may be regarded
as an intermediate variant between Thomistic and Ockhamistic positions.
miglecki and Ortiz traditionally interpreted the logical level of universals theory. They
attributed to universal traditional scholastic propria: immateriality, incorruptibility, predicability
and being an object of scientific knowledge.
27
Bibliography:
1. Darowski, R. 1994. Filozofia w kolegiach jezuickich w Polsce w XVI wieku. Krakw:

Wydzia filozoficzny towarzystwa jezusowego.
2. Ortizius, J. 15961597. In universam Aristotelis Logicam Summula. Vilnae. (Cracow, The
Jagellonian library, manuscript 2080)
3. Plekaitis, R. 2004. Lietuvos filosofijos istorija. I tomas. Viduramiai renesansas
naujieji amiai. Vilnius: Kultros, filosofijos ir meno institutas.
4. Smiglecius, M. 1618. Logica Martini Smiglecii Societatis Iesu, s. theologiae doctoris, selectis
disputationibus et quaestionibus illustrata, et in duos tomos distributa. Ingolstadii.
5. Smiglecius, M. 1987. Commentaria in Organum Aristotelis (Vilnae, 15861587), ed. L.
Nowak. Warszawa: Akademia teologii jezuickiej, fascicles 1, 2.
6. Suarez, F. 1614. Metaphysicarum disputationum tomi duo. Moguntiae, vol. 1.
7. Valatka, V. 2005. Pirmasis logikos amius Lietuvoje: ontinis universalij problemos
lygmuo, Logos 42: 2534.
8. Valatka, V. 2006. Pirmasis logikos amius Lietuvoje: gnoseologinis universalij teorijos
lygmuo, Logos 46: 7278.
9. Valatka, V. 2007. Pirmasis logikos amius Lietuvoje: loginis universalij teorijos lygmuo,
Logos, 52: 3946.
10. Viana, P. 1578. Assertiones philosophicae ex praecipuis totius philosophiae Aristotelis
difficultatibus. Vilnae. (The Kornik Library, Cim. Qu. 2590)
vitis valatka
filosofiis pirveli saukune litvaSi:

universaliebis Teoria
statiaSi gaanalizebulia universaliebis Teoria, romelsac XVI sau-

kunis litvur sqolastikur filosofiaSi erT-erTi wamyvani adgili ukavia.
kvlevaSi Teoriis epistemologiur da ontologiur doneebzea gamaxvile-
buli yuradReba. kerZod, gaanalizebulia universaliebis bunebis da Se-
mecnebasTan maTi mimarTebis sakiTxi. analizis Sedegad avtori askvnis, rom
litvuri versiebis mier SemuSavebuli xedva ontologiuri Wrilis Sesaxeb
ar SeiZleba mkacrad iqnes dayvanili realizmisa da nominalizmis romelime
klasikur variantze; Sedarebulia francisko suaresis pozicias da gamota-
nilia daskvna, rom igi SesaZloa CaiTvalos Sualedur modelad moderatul
realizmsa da konceptualizms Soris. epistemologiuri Wrili am Teoriisa
varirebs Tomisturidan okamisturi interpretaciisaken.
28
statiaSi detaluradaa gaanalizebuli XVI saukunis litveli RvTis-

metyvelebisa da filosofosebis: _ m. smigleskis, p. vianas da d. ortizis
mier SemoTavazebuli universaliebis Teoriis interpretaciebi. am avto-
rebs, profesor valatkas azriT, ainteresebT sakiTxis ontologiuri Wri-
li. avtori damajereblad amtkicebs, rom smigleskis analizSi aseve saxezea
universaliebis epistemologiuri Wrilis Tomisturi versia, romelic da-
fuZnebulia inteligibeluri da grZnobadi gvarebis species koncefciaze da
aqtiuri da pasiuri inteleqtis gansxvavebebze. smigleskisa da ortizis mier
universaliebis Teoriis logikuri ganaseris interpretacia tradiciuli
analizis farglebSia moqceuli. isini universaliebs tradiciuli sqolas-
tikuri atributiT propria ajildoeben. universalia miiCneva aramaterialu-
ri da maradiuli bunebis mqoned; es aris is, rac miewereba erTeulebs, ro-
gorc mecnieruli codnis obieqtebs.
29
demur jalaRonia
aToneli mamebi, ioane petriwi da gelaTuri azrovnebis

principebis dafuZneba
`Tu gsurT saerTod ar davcildeT keTils,

an filosofosi unda viyoT, an sxvisi filosofiis mimdevari~
grigol RvTismetyveli
warmodgenili statiis saTauri rodesac gaviazreT, Secvla gadav-

wyviteT, radgan Jurnalis gansazRvruli formati ar iZleoda saSualebas
problemis siRrmiseuli analizi gvewarmoebina. TavisTavad warmodgenili
sakiTxebis kvleva imdenad saintereso gveCveneboda, gadavwyviteT epoqa-
lur-magistraluri saazrovno Zafi dagveWira da gagvexsna qarTuli su-
lierebis filosofiur-Teologiuri principebis arsi. sxvadasxva avtorTa
naSromebis gacnobis Semdeg kidev erTxel warmoCnda, Tu raodeni mniSvne-
loba aqvs aToneli mamebis Rvawlis gaanalizebas da maTi Semoqmedebis war-
moCenas TanamedroveTaTvis.
aTonis kulturuli centri `mudam matarebeli iyo qarTuli erovnu-
li ideisa saberZneTSi, romelic gadaiqca im wyarod, saidanac CvenSi uxvad
modioda mowinave kulturis nakadi... erTi sityviT, arc erT samonastro
dawesebulebas iseTi mniSvneloba ar hqonia Cveni mwerlobis da kulturis
istoriaSi, rogoric aTonis iveriis monasters, uimisod Cveni kulturis is-
torias SeiZleba sxva saxe da xasiaTi mieRo~ (2. 88-89).
eqvTime da giorgi mTawmindelebs qarTuli mwerlobis da filoso-
fiuri azris istoriaSi sruliad gansakuTrebuli adgili ukaviaT. aTonis
literaturul da saRvTismetyvelo skolas saetapo mniSvneloba aqvs. ro-
desac saetapo mniSvnelobaze vsaubrobT, aRvniSnavT, rom pirvel umniS-
vnelovanes etapad unda miviCnioT camet asurel mamaTa mobrZaneba saqar-
TveloSi. es iyo axali sulierebis, saRvTismetyvelo skola-monastrebis
dafuZneba aRmosavleT saqarTveloSi. meore mniSvnelovani etapi gaxlavT
grigol xanZTelis da misi saZmos `Rvawlis~ gaanalizeba. giorgi merCulem
grigol xanZTelis cxovrebis aRweriT gaxsna daviwyebuli `qarTuli ideis~
suli da saqarTvelos rogorc sulieri, ise geografiuli sazRvrebi Semo-
uxaza. `qarTlad friadi queyana aRiracxebis, romelsaca Sina qarTuliTa
eniTa Jami Seiwirvis da locva yoveli aResrulebis~ (3).
XX saukuneSi pavle ingoroyvam Rrma filosofiur-Teologiuri, is-
toriuli gamokvleviT `giorgi merCuleTi~ SeZlo eCvenebina erTiani qar-
Tuli istoriuli saxelmwifos warmoSobis winamZRvrebi, qarTuli erov-
30
demur jalaRonia _ aToneli mamebi, ioane petriwi da gelaTuri azrovnebis
nuli cnobierebis gamoRviZebis da kulturul-politikuri saqmianobiT

aRsavse xana, ìm didi erovnuli moRvaweobis dasawyisi, ramac didgoris ga-
marjvebamde migviyvana~. `merCule~ aris mecnieri sjulis moZRvari, sjulis
maswavlebeli; xolo sjulis moZRvari unda yofiliyo, rogorc es Cans
grigol xanZTelis cxovrebis mixedviT, farTod ganaTlebuli swavluli,
`wignTa saRmrToTa mecnieri da eniTaca wurTili~ (4.4). grigol xanZTelis
rogorc sulieri, ise samwerlo da aRmSeneblobiTi moRvaweoba iyo uryevi
`kldesa zeda~ aSeneba rogorc eklesiis, aseve erTiani qarTuli saxelmwi-
fos saZirkvlis.
mesame etapi aris eqvTime da giorgi mTawmindelebis moRvaweoba da me-
oTxe etapad unda CaiTvalos gelaTis akademiis daarseba da ioane petriwis
moRvaweoba `gelaTuri azrovnebis~ principebis dafuZneba.
Cven vecdebiT movZebnoT etapebs Soris erTiani sulierebis Zafi, ro-
melic am mniSvnelovan etapebs Sekravs. sad devs, sad unda veZioT am sulie-
rebis safuZvlebi? am naSromis mokrZalebuli mizanic amis warmoCena iqneba.
aToneli mamebi eqvTime da giorgi udidesi moRvaweni gaxlavT. maTi
mizani iyo siRrmiseuli gacnoba bizantiisa da aRmosavleTis RvTismetyve-
lebisa, uSualo kontaqtebis damyareba qristianul samyarosTan. umTavres
miznad daisaxes mTargmnelobiTi moRvaweoba, Targmanis ganmarteba. es ar
xdeboda qaoturad, es xdeboda eris sulier-kulturul moTxovnilebaTa
Sesabamisad. `mTargmnelobis amocanebi da mizandasaxuloba imdenad speci-
fiuri iyo, rom igi SemoqmedebiT process utoldeboda~ (4. 109). garda Tar-
gmanebisa, maT mieraa Seqmnili originaluri Txzulebebi, romlebic mniSvne-
lovani pirvelwyaroebia qarTuli mwerlobis, Teologiis, istoriisa da,
saerTod, qarTuli kulturisaTvis.
eqvTime mTawmindeliT iwyeba didi mTargmnelobiTi moRvaweoba, ro-
melmac safuZveli Cauyara qarTul mwignobrobas. mas gansakuTrebuli ad-
gili uWiravs qarTuli mwerlobis da kulturis istoriaSi.
giorgi mTawmindelis cnobiT, qarTvelTa mefe daviT kurapalati eq-
vTimeze ambobda: `madli RmerTsa, romelmac CvenTa amad JamTa axali oqropi-
ri gamoaCina~. man Targmna saxareba oTxTavi, ioane RvTismetyvelis gamocxa-
deba, daviTni, egzegetikuri Txzulebani: andria kretelis `Targmani ioane
maxareblis xilvisa~, ioane oqropiris `Targmneba fsalmunisa~ da ìTika~,
grigol noseli, grigol nazianelis, maqsime aRmsareblis da sxvaTa Txzu-
lebani. efrem asuris `swavlani sulierni~. grigol I didis dialogebi, ioane
sinelis `klemaqsi~, qarTuli filosofiuri azris istoriisaTvis saintere-
so ìTika~. is Sedgeba ori nawilisagan: `swavlani~ da `Targmaneba fsalmun-
Tasa~. swavlani aris basili didis qadagebaTa krebuli, sadac avtori exeba
dogmatikis sakiTxebs da moralis Temebs, romelic miznad isaxavda sazo-
gadoebis zneobriv srulyofas. gaanalizebulia, Tu ra aris Suri, sixarbe,
31
umaduroba, angareba. aseve sainteresodaa ganxiluli pirovnebis Tavisuf-

leba, sikeTe. SemTxveviTi ar aris am Txzulebis Targmna. es aris epoqaluri
mniSvnelobis, radgan eris sulierebisa da zneobriobisaTvis unda Seewyo am
Targmans xeli. rogorc mkvlevrebi miuTiTeben, es nawarmoebebi warmoad-
gens ioane patriwis `ganmartebas bolosityvaobis wyaros (6.61).
unda aRiniSnos, rom eqvTime mTawmindelis TargmanebSi saTanadod ar
aisaxa filosofiis, rogorc moZRvrebis da disciplinis, Suasaukuneobri-
vi gageba. èqusTa dReTa~ da `swavlani~-s TargmaniT qarTul azrovnebaSi
kosmologiur-anTropologiurma sakiTxebma wamoiwia wina planze, romelic
qristianuli filosofiis kosmologiur safuZvels warmoadgenda. maT da-
amkvidres anTropologiuri koncefcia, es koncefcia zogadad gulisxmob-
da adamianis, rogorc sulieri moRvawis cxovrebisa da qcevis eTikuri nor-
mebis, zneobrivi kanonebis damkvidrebas adamianis zneobrivi srulyofis
gzaze (7. 47-48).
eqvTime mTawmindelis mier Targmnilia 160-ze meti nawarmoebi, gada-
muSavebuli Tavisufali Targmanis meTodiT, romelic SemoqmedebiT pro-
cess utoldeba. mis mier saocrad didi moculobis da masStabis samuSao-
ebia Catarebuli. man icxovra mxolod 65 weli da SeZlo wmida didi mamebis
naSromis qarTul enaze Targmna. man Seqmna Targmanebisa da komentarebis se-
riozuli saRvTismetyvelo literaturis `biblioTekac, romelic iyo sa-
fuZveli erovnuli, sulieri da saxelmwifoebrivi aRorZinebisa.
rogorc efrem mcire aRniSnavs: eqvTimes `madliTa sulisa wmindisai-
Ta xelewifeboda Sematebaica da klebaica~. is monurad ar misdevs berZnul
teqts, sityvasityviT ar Targmnis mas: is avrcobs an amoklebs teqsts; Seaqvs
Sig sxvadasxva wyarodan damatebiTi cnobebi.
vin aris giorgi mTawmindeli da ra gaakeTa man? misi biografi aRwers
mis Rvawls da gvixatavs srul portrets: ,,Tu romelnime wignni, sruliad
ara yofilni da enisagan Cvenisa ucxoni, siRrmeTgan umecrebisaiTa naT-
lad gamobrwyinda. xolo sxvani, odesme TargmanTani da wuT ver keTilad
gadmoRebulni, gana Tu JamTa sigrZiTa ucbad da ugunurTa mxarobelTman
dageslebulni, brZmeds, mas Sina wmidisa gonebisa Tvisisa gamoadevnina da
gamokurvna~, `xolo kualad sxvani wigni wmidisa mamisa Cvenisa efTvimesi mi-
er Targmnilni da ucilobiT wuT ver srulqmnilni, aramed sul mcired aR-
werilni, ganasrula da ganavrcna da kualad sxvani romelnime berZnulisa
Seawamna da yovlisa naklulevnebisagan ganasrulna~ (aTonis krebuli, 310).
ratom iCenen aToneli moRvaweni kapadokielTa naSromebis Targmna-
ze did interess? kapadokielebi saqarTveloSi cnobilni iyvnen jer kidev
`winaaTonur periodSi~. winaaTonuri periodi X saukunemdea. gamokveTilad
unda iTqvas, rom qarTuli qristianuli cnobierebis nakadebi kapadokiele-
bis RvTismetyvelebas efuZneba.
32
kapadokiuri kulturis aRorZineba X XI saukuneebSi qarTuli azrov-

nebis istoriaSi udavo faqtia da samecniero literaturaSi safuZvlianadaa
dasabuTebuli. samecniero literaturaSi kapadokiel mamaTa moZRvrebebi
miCneulia ganaTlebis im xazad saqarTveloSi, romelic misi ganviTarebis
axal periodSi qristianuli neoplatonizmis (kapadokielTa gziT) utyuari
gavlenis kvalze metyvelebs. basili didis saeklesio politika ZiriTadad
agebuli iyo qristianul kacTmoyvareobasa da keTilganwyobaze TviT mtre-
bis mimarTac ki, maTTan urTierTobisas sirbilisa da simkacris saocar Se-
zavebaze, ris wyalobiTac garemomcveli eklesiis interesTa dacvas saswa-
ulebrivad axerxebda (7.88). rogorc grigol RvTismetyveli wers: adami-
anebs igi àra xrikebis xelovnebiT ipyrobda, aramed keTilganwyobiT izi-
davda, windawin Zalas ki ar iyenebda, aramed Zalas SewyalebiT imorCilebda
da, rac yvelaze mniSvnelovania, imorCilebda imiT, rom yvela uTmobda mis
gonierebas, miuwvdomel mis saTnoebas aRiarebda da Tavis gadarCenas mxo-
lod maTTan da misi xelmZRvanelobis qveS yofnaSi xedavda, iseve rogorc
saSiSadac erTi ram miaCnda misi mtroba, da misgan gandgomas RmrTisagan
gaucxoebad Tvlida~. aseTi xasiaTi Zalian axlobeli iyo qarTveli adamia-
nisaTvis, qarTuli sulisaTvis. qarTveli adamianis sulierebisaTvis kapa-
dokieli mamebis naSromebi masazrdoebeli Tavankara wyaro iyo.
giorgi mTawmindelma dagvitova 60-ze meti naTargmni naSromi, rome-
lic RvTismetyvelebis yvela dargs Seexeba. bibliologiaSi man Targmna
`daviTni~, saxareba-oTxTavi da `wigni samociqulo~. es wignebi adrec iyo
Targmnili, magram man axali TargmaniT Seajera isini berZnul teqstTan da
gaaswora. rogorc swavlulebi aRniSnavdnen, giorgi mTawmindelma bibliis
TargmaniT ganapiroba axali qarTuli enis ganviTareba.
hagiografiuli Txzulebidan man Targmna `wameba wmidisa da didisa
basilisi da mowamisa giorgisi~. aseve mis kalams ekuTvnis originaluri ha-
giografiuli naSromi `cxovreba ioanesi da efTimesi~. apokrifebidan cno-
bili àvgarozi an miwer-mowera ieso qristesa da efesis mefe avgarozs So-
ris~.
egzegetikuri wignebidan man Targmna: basili didis èqusTa dReTaT-
vis~, giorgi noselis `TargmanebaTa qeba-qebaTisa da sxva. es Targmanebi
aTonuri skolis saukeTeso tradiciebiT aris Sesrulebuli. rogoria mi-
si mTargmnelobiTi meTodi? es Camoyalibebuli aqvs mas Tavis anderZSi: `da
vin swerdeT viTa aqa hyoT egreTve Seucvaleblad daswereT, nuca CaurTavT,
nuca daaklebT, Cven romeli jer iyo CagvirTavs da romeli jer iyo dagvik-
lia, viTa Cuensa enasa modioda da wesi saqmisa exeboda~.
naTlad Cans, rom TargmanSi `CarTva~ da `gamokleba~ saerTo damaxasi-
aTebeli niSani iyo aTonelTaTvis. aTonuri skolis warmomadgenlebisaTvis
Targmna sulac ar niSnavda originalis pirdapir gadmocemas. isini iyeneb-
33
dnen e.w. `Tavisufali~ gamokrebiT Targmnis meTods. saTargmn masalas sa-

kuTari Sexedulebisamebr alagebdnen, avrcobdnen an amoklebdnen. giorgi
mTawmindeli saTargmn teqsts ise Tavisuflad ar ekideboda, rogorc eq-
vTime. rogorc Tavad SeniSnavs: ,,Cven romelic jer iyo CagvirTavs, da rome-
li jer iyo, dagviklia, viTa Cvensa enasa mohvidoda da wesi saqmisa eZiebda~.
meTerTmete saukunemde, arsebiTad, mxolod berZnulenovani samyaro-
dan iTargmneboda wignebi qarTulad, Semdgom iwyeba sparsulenovani mwer-
lebis Targmna (es Semdgomi kvlevis saqmea). giorgi mTawmindeli SesaniSnavi
moRvawea Cvens istoriaSi, man Tavisi kvali daaCnia yvela dargs. is iyo udi-
desi patrioti, romelmac Tavisi dauRalavi SromiT `yovelni ganakvirna~,
ara xolo qarTvelni, aramed berZennica da amernic.
giorgi mTawmindeli amayad eubneba antioqiis patriarqs: `wmidao meu-
feo, Suenis esreT, raiTa wodebuli igi mwodebelsa mas daemorCilos, rame-
Tu petresi jer ars, raiTa daemorCilos mwodebelsa Tvissa da Zmasa andre-
as, da raiTa Tqven Cven dagvemorCilneT~.
ioane petriwi Sua saukuneebis azrovnebaSi im xazis gamgrZelebelia,
romelic qristianul kulturaSi kapadokiel mamebidan modis da XI saukunis
II naxevarSi bevr saerTos poulobs prokles neoplatonizmTan. XII saukunis
qarTveli Teologi da filosofosi ioane petriwi gvevlineba antikurobisa
da qristianobis mimarTebis mkvlevrad. petriwma originaluri da detalu-
ri komentari daurTo V saukunis platonikosis prokles Txzulebas `Teo-
logiis safuZvlebi~ (`kavSirni RvTismetyvelebisani~).
petriwi cdilobs prokles filosofiis, zogadad, antikurobis neop-
latonizmisa da Sua saukuneebis qristianuli ontologiis siRrmiseuli
analizi mogvces.
524 wels sikvdiliT dasajes boeciusi, qristiani neoplatonikosi,
romelsac undoda antikuri filosofiis gadamuSaveba da misi Cayeneba axa-
li epoqis samsaxurSi. amave wels italiaSi, monte- kazinaSi benediqte ner-
selma daaarsa dasavluri tipis pirveli monasteri, rogorc axali epoqis
sulieri kulturis ganviTarebis centri. bunebrivia, Teologia manamdec
arsebobda, e.w. eklesiis mamaTa epoqa II saukunidan iwyeba: tertuliane, ro-
melic uaryofs aTensa da ierusalimis akademiasa da eklesias Soris Tanxmo-
bis SesaZleblobas. klementi aRmsarebeli cdilobda qristianuli rwmenisa
da filosofiis morigebas, xolo origene filosofias Teologiis msaxurs
uwodebda.
XI XII saukuneebSi, roca saqarTvelos oqros xana edga, mefe daviT
aRmaSenebelma aaSena gelaTis akademia. akademias saTaveSi Caudga cnobili
filosofosi da RvTismetyveli ioane petriwi. gelaTis Teologiur-filo-
sofiuri akademia iqca axal ierusalimad da meore aTenad, anu, sulierebis
da mecnieruli kvlevis centrad. is iyo sibrZnis da rwmenis taZari. gelaTis
34
akademiaSi Caeyara safuZveli antikuri filosofiisa da neoplatonizmis

Seswavlas.
gelaTis akademia qristianuli azris istoriaSi agrZelebs aRmosav-
luri Teologiis aleqsandriuli skolis (sadac wm. werilis aleqsandriul
egzegezas Caeyara safuZveli) da kapadokiuri patristikis xazs: klimenti
aleqsandrielisa, romelmac Camoyalibebuli principis saxe misca wm. we-
rilze dayrdnobil eklesiur moZRvrebas rwmenisa da codnis harmoniaze.
origenisa, romelmac Tavisi pirveli cdebiT qristianoba axsna elinuri az-
ris kategoriebSi, safuZveli Cauyara qristianul filosofiur xedvebs; ka-
padokieli wm. mamebisa da areopagitikisa, romelic rwmenisa da codnis har-
moniis brwyinvale nimuSs warmoadgens (8.10).
klimenti aleqsandrieli mTeli Tavisi cxovrebiT da naSromebiT aRi-
arebda rwmenis da mecnierebis sinTezs, anu ìerusalims da aTenas~. upirve-
les mniSvnelobas rwmenas aniWebda, Semdeg ki rwmenaze dafuZnebul mec-
nierebas. misi azriT, RmerTi da Cveni yofis RvTaebrivi azri rwmenisa da
gonebis gadakveTaze unda veZeboT. is saxarebaze dayrdnobiT qristianebs
or jgufad hyofs. pirveli monani RvTisani. eseni arian rwmenis Sesaxeb pri-
mitiuli rwmenis mqone morwmuneni, romlebic martivad ganixilaven wminda
werils, ar uRrmavdebian mis sakralur azrs da kmayofildebian igaviTa da
simboloTa pirdapiri gagebiT.
meore jgufs miekuTvnebian gnostikosebi, filosofosebi (mecniere-
bi), romlebic rwmeniTa da codnis wyalobiT adian maRali sulieri da mis-
tikuri Wvretis safexurze. maT is uflis megobars uwodebs.
sruliad saqarTvelos kaTolikos-patriarqi ilia II brZanebs: àdami-
anma unda ganvlos srulyofilebis gza RvTis monobidan RvTis megobrobam-
de, Tu surs gaacnobieros Tavisi adgili da daniSnuleba am qveyanaze~ (1.
161).
aseTi adamianisaTvis mTavari mamoZravebeli Zalaa ara jildos miRe-
bis survili, an sasjelis SiSi, aramed RvTis da sikeTis qmnis uangaro survi-
li. amgvari pirovneba Tavisufldeba Suris, SiSis, borotebis da sxva vnebe-
bisagan. mas uyvars yvela da cdilobs dauaxlovdes RmerTs. esaa `gelaTuri
azrovnebis~ principi.
`gelaTi~ iqca simbolod qarTuli erovnuli ideisa da es edo safuZ-
vlad Sua saukuneebSi qarTuli saxelmwifos siZlieres. unda iTqvas, rom
saqarTvelos amis didi tradicia gaaCnia da am tradiciis, anu `gelaTuri
azrovnebis~ aRmdgenad XX saukuneSi mogvevlina sruliad saqarTvelos ka-
Tolikos-patriarqi ilia II.
ilia II-is Teologiur-saRvTismetyvelo azrovneba sam saunjes efuZ-
neba: `RmerTi, samSoblo da moyvasi~. samSoblo gagebuli Teologiur
WrilSi, rogorc `Cemi, aseve Seni~; sauflo uflis mier Seqmnili samyaro,
35
xolo `moyvasi~ es aris pirvel rigSi `Cemi~, `Seni~ axlobeli, adamiani sa-
zogadoeba, kacobrioba.
masTan samive saunje aris triada. erTianobaSi da erTmaneTis gareSe
maTi arseboba SeuZlebelia. mTeli misi Teologiuri, sulieri, zneobrivi,
Teoriuli da praqtikuli moRvaweoba am triadis veqtorSi trialebs. bu-
nebrivad dgeba sakiTxi, rogor aris SesaZlebeli am triadis erT sistemaSi
moqceva? rwmenisa da codnis erTianobis gaazrebiT, anu ,,gelaTuri az-
rovnebis principiT.
literatura:
1. sruliad saqarTvelos kaTolikos-patriarqi ilia II, epistoleni,

sityvani, qadagebani, t. II. 1997 w.
2. korneli kekeliZe, Zveli qarTuli mwerlobis istoria, t. I, Tb., 1951 w.
3. giorgi merCule, grigol xanZTelis cxovreba, Tb., 1987 w.
4. pavle ingoroyva, giorgi merCule, narkvevebi Zveli saqarTvelos
literaturis, kulturis da saxelmwifoebrivi cxovrebis istoriidan,
naw. I, Tb., 2009 w.
5. qarTuli filosofiuri azris istoria, t. I, 1996 w.
6. Zveli hagiografiuli literaturis Zeglebi, wigni II, Tb., 1967 w.
7. enver (nukri) baraTaSvili, basili kesareli da aTonis mwignobruli
skola, religia, 2, Tb., 2010 w.
8. wminda basili didi, Txzulebani, winasityvaoba, gvanca koplataZe, Tb.,
2002 w.
9. damana meliqiSvili, gelaTi `sxva aTina da meore ierusalimi~. Tb., 2006 w.
DEMUR JALAGHONIA
Athonian Fathers, Ioane Petritsi and the Establishment of Principles of

Gelati Thinking
Summary
The cultural centre of Athos (Athoni in Georgian) always bore the Georgian national
idea in Greece and became the source which provided Georgia with advanced cultural ideasp In
a word, none of the monastic institutions have ever had such importance for the history of our
36
literature and culture as the Iberian Monastery of Athos; without it the history of our culture co-
uld have assumed a different shape.
Eqvtime and Giorgi Mtatsmindeli occupy a unique place in the history of Georgian let-
ters and philosophical thinking. Speaking about the greatest significance of the literary and the-
ological school of Athos we imply the fact of arrival of thirteen Assyrian fathers in Georgia.
It brought about the establishment of a new spirituality, theological school and monasteries in
eastern Georgia. The second significant stage was the study and analysis of Grigol Khandzteli
and his brotherhood. Giorgi Merchule opened the forgotten spirit of the Georgian idea by
describing Grigol Khandztelis life and delimited both, the spiritual and geographical borders
of Georgia. Kartli is a large country were religious services are held and the prayers are said in
the Georgian language.
The work of Eqvtime and Giorgi Mtatsmindeli is the third stage, and the foundation of
Gelati Academy and Ioane Petritsis work the development of Gelati thinking must be con-
sidered to be the fourth stage.
We intend to find a single spiritual thread between these stages that will be able to bind all
of them together. Where does it lie, where shall we search for these spiritual foundations? This
is the humble purpose of our work.
The Athonian fathers Eqvtime and Giorgi were outstanding figures. Their aim was to de-
velop direct contacts with the Christian world. They made it their objective to translate literature
into Georgian and to interpret the translated literature. It did not have a chaotic character, but
rather met the needs of the nations spiritual and cultural requirements. The tasks and intent
was so specific that it equalled the creative process. In addition to the translations, they created
original works that are a significant primary source for the Georgian literature, theology, history
and Georgian culture in general.
Translation work starts with Eqvtime Mtatsmindeli who laid the foundation for the Geor-
gian scholarly pursuit. This event occupies a particular place in the history of Georgian literature
and culture.
The renaissance of the Cappadocian culture in the history of Georgian thinking of the
10 -11th centuries is an indisputable fact and is substantially confirmed by scientific literature.
th
The teachings of the Cappadocian fathers in Georgia are believed to belong to the line that de-
monstrates a definite trace of Christian Neo-Platonism (via Cappadocians) in the new period of
its development, in particular, of Basil the Great.
In the medieval thinking Ioane Petritsi is the follower of the line that took start from Cap-
padocian fathers in Christian culture and in the 2nd half of the 11th century found much in com-
mon with the Neo-Platonism of Procles.
In XI-XII centuries, during the Golden Age of Georgia, King Davit Aghmashenebeli erec-
ted the Academy of Gelati. In the history of Christian thinking Gelati Academy followed the line
of the Alexandrian school of theology (where a foundation was laid for the Alexandrian exegeses
of the Holy Scripture) and Cappadocian patristics Clement of Alexandria, having given eccle-
siastic teaching a form of an established principle, harmony of faith and knowledge.
37
Gelati turned into a symbol of Georgian national idea which laid foundation to the strength
and power of the Georgian state of the Middle Ages. It is worth mentioning that the Catholicos
-Patriarch of all Georgia, Ilia II brought to life this tradition, i.e., the tradition of Gelati thin-
king, in the 21st century.
Theological thinking of Ilia II is based on the three highest treasures: God, Patria and
Neighbour. Homeland, on the theological plane, is interpreted as mine and yours, the Kin-
gdom of Lord the world created by God; whereas the neighbour is primarily your, my
close person the community, the humanity.
With him all the three treasures make up a triad together and without one another their
existence is incomprehensible.
38
metafizika
METAPHYSICS
BURT C. HOPKINS
Prolegomenon to a Critique of Symbolic Reason
The things said in mathematics are true and fawningly seduce the soul (sainei tn psyche)
Aristotle (Metaph. N3.1090b1)
Introduction
Jacob Kleins Greek Mathematical Thought and the Origin of Algebra1 is as remarkable
for what it purports to demonstrate as for what it doesnt. It purports to demonstrate a seam in
the transformation of the ancient Greek concept of number into the modern concept that exposes
the modern concepts structural diminishing of what it means to be a number. Thus, for Klein,
whereas in the Greek conception, number is inseparable from a multitude of items to which it,
as number, is directly related, in the modern conception number no longer relates directly to a
multitude but to the concept of a multitude from which everything has been abstracted save for
the sign whose apprehension is identical with this concept itself. Kleins GMT, however, doesnt
purport to view this transformation within what he himself referred to in the Authors Note to
the English translation as the larger perspective of the change from the ancient to the modern
mode of thinking. Indeed, as Richard Kennington observed, The book lacked an introduction
and it needed a concluding part.2 In what follows, I propose to view the larger perspective of
this transition through the lens provided by the Kantian concept of a critique of pure reason.
By asking and attempting to answer the question of whether Kleins account of what he calls
1
Jacob Klein, Die griechische Logistik und die Entstehung der Algebra in Quellen und Studien zur
Geschichte der Mathematik, Astronomie und Physik, Abteilung B: Studien, vol. 3, no. 1 (1934), 18-
105 (Part I), and no. 2 (1936), 122-235 (Part II); English translation: Greek Mathematical Thought
and the Origin of Algebra, trans. Eva Brann (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1969; reprint: New
York: Dover, 1992), Hereafter GMT.
2
Kennington, Richard. Review of J. Klein, Lectures and Essays. Review of Metaphysics 41 (1987):
144-49, here 145.
39
the symbolic abstraction3 responsible for the genesis of the modern concept of number can
be seen as what Kant characterizes as an assessment4 (B25) of pure reason, it is my intent to
venture a prolegomenon to a critique of what, following Klein, I want to argue is most properly
called symbolic reason.
By invoking Kants notion of the critique of pure reason I do not intend to suggest that
Klein himself understood his historical-philosophical analysis of the ancient Greek and early
modern concept of number in Kantian terms. Nor do I want to suggest that the project of a
philosophical system within which Kant articulated the need for critique is philosophically
relevant to Kleins analysis. Rather, I propose to extract from Kants philosophy the concept of
critique understood as an assessment of a cognitive faculty or capacity that does not aim at the
extension of cognition itself (B26) but at its purification (B25) in a manner that would keep
it free of error. Thus, for the purpose of viewing Kleins demonstration in the GMT from the
larger perspective of the difference between ancient and modern thinking, I want to employ Kants
idea that rather than provide knowledge of the objects of cognition, for instance, an accelerating
body or the hypotenuse of a right-angled triangle, the assessment of a cognitive faculty aims at its
correction (B26) in a manner that is supposed to furnish the touchstone of the value or lack of
value of all the cognition stemming from the faculty in question. In Kants case, the correction
involves determining the boundary of pure reasons permitted use in the face of the troublesome
call of reason, which, as befits its vocation, demands something that satisfies itself5 (4:381) and,
which, therefore, left unchecked, succumbs to the centuries old illusion that it (pure reason) is
capable of determining the nature of intelligible beings. In Kleins case, of course, the correction
appropriate to symbolic reason provided by its critique remains to be seen.
Critique and Historical Origin
Kants critique of pure reason is driven by the conviction that by learning (4:329) the
origin of the concepts employed in our cognition it is possible to be able to determine their
[correct] use with certainty. Kleins account of symbolic abstraction can be said to share this
conviction. Indeed, what is at stake for Kant as for Klein in the positive result of learning the
origin of the concepts in question is the determination for all time of the scope and limits of a
3
Jacob Klein, GMT, 125, 202, 205, 208, 224. See also Burt C. Hopkins, The Origin of the Logic
of Symbolic Mathematics. Edmund Husserl and Jacob Klein (Bloomington: Indiana University
Press, 2011), 306-12. (Hereafter Origin.) The English translation renders Kleins symbolische
Abstraktion as symbol generating abstraction, a change in terminology that the translator, Eva
Brann, reports met with Kleins approval (Origin, Preface, xxvii, n. 3). However, Kleins original
terminology will be retained here, for reasons discussed in Origin, 306-7, n. 165.
4
Immanuel Kant, Critique of Pure Reason, trans. Norman Kemp Smith (New York: St Martins
Press, 1965). All references are to the original page numbers reproduced in the margin.
5
Immanuel Kant, Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics, trans. Gary Hatfield (Cambridge: Cam-
bridge University Press, 2005). All references are to the original page numbers reproduced in the
margin.
40
barT s. hopkinsi _ simboluri gonebis kritikis prologomenebi
cognitive faculty in relation to the objects of cognition. Notwithstanding this shared conviction,
however, the radical difference between Kants account of the origin of concepts in the faculty
of pure reason itself (B27) and Kleins account of the origin of concepts in symbolic abstraction
presents a challenge to the legitimacy of using Kantian critique as a lens through which to view
the larger perspective of what is demonstrated in the GMT. To wit, for Klein the philosophical
significance of this origin is inseparable from an account of the meaning of all the concepts
involved that is patently historical, whereas for Kant the proper subject of critique, the faculty of
pure reason itself, is understood as an a-historical touchstone for appraising the philosophical
import of old and new works in this field (B27).
Overcoming this challenge involves nothing less than coming to terms with the doubly
paradoxical status of historical explanation in Kleins GMT. On the one hand, it appeals to
historically datable mathematical and philosophical texts and their authors in order to trace a
significant transformation of the formal meaning of mathematical concepts. On the other hand,
the appeal to these concepts origin in historically datable facts is not only not understood by
Klein to threaten their formal meanings with historical relativity, but it is actually thought by
him to bring to light an historical category whose content determines the scope and limits of its
extension to formal mathematical meanings in a manner that highlights rather than diminishes
their objectivity. In other words, Klein does not think his appeal to the historical origin of
mathematical concepts renders their meaning historically relative in a manner that threatens the
objectivity of their content, a state of affairs that would have to be characterized pejoratively
as historicism. And, moreover, he thinks that his historical explanation of the formal meaning
of mathematical concepts brings to light an historical category of meaning, the modern, which,
despite its historical origin, has a structural content that sets limits to all cognition determined by
its content in a manner that does not vary over the course of time.
On my view, the key to resolving these paradoxes lies in recognizing the peculiar quality
that history takes on when the paradigm for historical explanation shifts from factually datable
res gestae (things that happened), to which neither necessity nor formal objectivity can be said
to belong, to the investigation of formal structures whose complete meaning as formal is only
intelligible on the basis of an investigation of the cognition in which such formal structures were
originally generated. In the case at hand, the formal meaning in question is the generalized
or terminologically equivalent formalized6 concept of number (Zahl) and number in general
presupposed by modern algebra. For Klein, the complete meaning of a formalized concept, which
is to say the answer to the question of what and how it signifies whatever it is that it signifies,
cannot be established without reproducing or attempting to reproduce the original cognition
that generated the peculiar formal meaning characteristic of it as a formalized concept. It is
this original cognition that Klein refers to as symbolic abstraction and that he argues remains
philosophically inaccessible so long as the meanings of both formal and abstraction are taken
to be historically invariant from the time of the Greeks to what for him was the historical present.
Indeed, for Klein this philosophical inaccessibility works both ways, as the Greek understanding
of formal and abstraction likewise remains inaccessible on the same assumption.
6
Hereafter referred to as formalized.
41
History, then, understood as retrospectively dated and datable events that happened,
and thus history in the sense of the contingent succession of such events, therefore figures in
what is explicitly demonstrated in the GMT, even though the specifically historical meaning
of the category of the modern as it is used there cannot be reduced to historical meaning
in this sense. This category cannot be so reduced because history in this sense is empirical
and therefore neither necessary nor formally invariant, whereas the historical category of the
modern that is applied by Klein to thought, as one of its modes, is precisely both necessary and
formally invariant. Thus, despite the contingency inseparable from the retrospective dating that
is constitutive of the historical category of the modern and the essentially related historical
category of the ancient, on Kleins telling neither the transformation of the Greek concept of
number into the modern concept, nor the comparative diminishment of the being of the latter in
relation to the former, are accessible in the empirical phenomenon of history. This is the case for
Klein because both this transformation and diminishment take place in a kind of cognition whose
objects are apprehended exclusively in thought and therefore possess a purely formal being. And
yet, despite the formality of the latter, which is to say, their quality as invariant, self-identical,
and, therefore, in some sense, their quality as objects outside of empirical history, Kleins GMT
nevertheless claims to demonstrate that precisely this formality is historically determined. Of
course, the historical determination at stake is not a consequence of historys contingency as
an empirical phenomenon but rather the result of the peculiar modes of thought that this book
purports to show fall respectively under the historically determined categories of the ancient
Greek and the modern.
The Critical Difference between Mathematical and Philosophical Cognition
The challenge that the doubly paradoxical appeal to history in Kleins GMT presents to the
legitimacy of employing the lens of Kants concept of critique in order to view its main finding
in the larger perspective of the change from the ancient to the modern mode of thought can
therefore be met by attending to the non-conventional meaning of history at work in that book.
This meaning, in contrast to the conventional opposition between the contingency of empirical
history and the non-contingency of formal objects of thought, identifies historical categories
the modern and the ancient that despite being datable nevertheless single out the commonality
of conceptual contents that are not subject to the alteration characteristic of empirical historys
contingency. The paradox inherent in Kleins historical genealogy of mathematical objects,
which as the objects they are possess an intrinsic meaning that cannot be more opposite than the
conventional meaning of history, is thus not resolved by making it go away but by recognizing
the deeper paradox that he claims to demonstrate via this genealogy. The deeper paradox, namely,
that those mathematical objects, despite their intrinsic formality, nevertheless have a meaning
relative to the common suppositions that fall under the historically datable categories involved
in this paradox.
It is therefore this paradox, or, more precisely, to speak both with Kant and with Klein, the
possibility of this paradox, that I propose to view through the framework provided by Kants
42
concept of a critique of cognition. It is no doubt not an accident that the focal point of Kants critique
of pure reason concerns the difference between pure reasons philosophical and mathematical
employment of concepts. Kant thinks that the apodictic character of mathematical knowledge,
that is, its twin qualities of necessity and certainty, provides a suitable standard for assessing the
scope and limits of pure reasons philosophical employment of concepts. This is because while
cognition in both philosophy and mathematics involves concepts whose meaning is not derived
from sensible-perception, only in mathematics is cognition self-evidently scientific, in that no
other cognitive authority than mathematics itself needs to be appealed to in order to recognize
its status as a science. Philosophy, in contrast, for Kant is in the unhappy position of having to
justify its scientific status, which for him means its proper cognitive rights. And it is critique
that is supposed to do this, by showing once and for all that philosophy and mathematics differ
with respect to their forms of cognition and not, as is commonly thought, with respect to their
matter or objects. Therefore, on Kants view, philosophy deals with magnitudes just as much
as mathematics (B743), with the decisive difference that philosophical cognition is cognition
through reason from concepts while mathematical cognition is cognition through reason from
the construction of concepts. That is, philosophical cognition employs universal concepts that
belong to pure reason to understand particular objects that do not belong to such reason, and
mathematical cognition, while also employing pure reasons universal concepts, nevertheless
does so in a manner that, in a fashion, brings into existence the particular objects that make up
the content of its cognition. Thus, what is possible for mathematical cognition is impossible for
philosophical cognition, namely, knowledge of the determinate nature of its pure concepts. For
my purposes, the details of how this distinction is worked out by Kant are less important than
the status of the critical point he thinks is established on its basis, namely, the establishment for
all time of the truth of a philosophical cognition about the difference between mathematical and
philosophical cognition.
Klein, too, not only proceeds in the GMT as if it were possible to establish an everlasting
philosophical cognition about the true difference between mathematical and philosophical
cognition, but he so proceeds twice, first in the case of their ancient and second in the case of
their modern difference. Indeed, it is precisely the historical relativity that characterizes these
two modes of thought that composes the paradox I have called attention to at the basis of what
Klein purports to demonstrate and whose larger perspective I am proposing to consider here
through the framework of Kantian critique.
The historical determination of modes of thought in Kleins analysis shows that the
ancient Greek and modern concepts of the formal objects of thought, together with the modes
of cognition that apprehend them, have nothing in common, if the measure for what is in
common is taken to be an objective or subjective genus. They are, therefore, quite literally,
heterogeneous. Thus, despite the employment of the same or similar terminology, for example,
number, magnitude, formal, universal, number, image, original, and abstraction, there
is no commonality that unites the referents of these terms in their ancient and modern use or so
it is maintained by the thesis that drives Kleins account of these matters.
43
Incommensurability of Ancient and Modern Modes of Thinking
Klein establishes the possibility of such a conceptual incommensurability in terms of

the difference between what he calls the Greek and modern conceptuality (Begrifflichkeit).7
He uses this term to refer to the characteristics that determine the basic concepts employed in
mathematical and philosophical cognition. These characteristics concern, on the one hand, a
concepts relation to that which is other than it and therefore to that which is non-conceptual.
On the other hand, they concern a concepts relation to other concepts. On Kleins view, a
comparative examination of both of these conceptual characteristics in the cases of the concepts
operative in the philosophy and mathematics of the ancient Greeks and that of the early moderns
discloses a basic difference. He articulates this difference by using the Scholastic language of
first and second intentions.8 First intention articulates the minds relation to beings that
are prior to their conception by the mind, and second intention articulates the minds relation
to those beings that only exist as a result of its own conception.
The objects of first intentions are beings that are directly apprehensible by the minds
concepts as other than these concepts, while the objects of second intentions are apprehended
by the minds concepts as being dependent on other concepts. Kleins GMT advances the bold
claim that whereas the conceptuality of ancient Greek mathematics and philosophy is defined
by its structural distinction between first and second intentions, the conceptuality of early
modern mathematics and philosophy is defined by their structural identification; hence the
incommensurability of these two conceptualities.
This claim gives rise to two immediate questions. One, what is the mathematical and
philosophical significance of this shift? Two, how is knowledge of it possible, which is to say, what
conceptual perspective permits Klein to arrive at cognition of the incommensurable structural
difference between the ancient Greek and early modern modes of thought? The first part of the
first question is the easiest to answer because for Klein the mathematical significance of this
shift is the invention of symbolic algebra, that is, of a theoretical logistic whose basic units of
calculation are sensible ciphers and letters that are inseparable from a concept of magnitude that
is arithmetically and geometrically indeterminate; indeterminate in the sense having the novel
status of a general concept of magnitude. The philosophical significance of this shift is less easy
to pinpoint, as Kleins articulation of it is twofold. On the one hand, the shift in conceptuality
that makes early modern mathematics possible, that is, the structural identification of first and
second intentions and therefore of their objects, holds also for the early modern transformation
of the conceptuality proper to philosophical method and theory. On the other hand, because of
this, the new science made possible by the invention of modern algebra, mathematical physics,
understands itself as the rightful heir to the method and theory of ancient Greek philosophy.
7
This term is translated as intentionality in GMT rather than the more straightforward concep-
tuality that will be employed here. The reasons for the latter being preferable are discussed in
Origin, 80 n. 7.
8
See GMT, 175, 192, 208; Jacob Klein, The World of Physics and the Natural World, in Lectures
and Essays, Eds. Robert B. Williamson and Elliott Zuckerman (Annapolis: St. Johns College
Press, 1985), 1-34, here 17, 26-27; see also Origin, 286, 297, 312-13, 508-10.
44
Moreover, for Klein, the peculiar conceptuality determinative of the symbolic reason that makes
modern mathematics possible also comes to determine the conceptuality per se of modern
consciousness,9 the social and economic products of which he refers to in one place in terms
of a symbolic unreality10 that, however, may be overcome by understanding how ancient
science approached the world.
This last point brings me to what I take to be the answer to the second question above,
namely, how it was possible for Klein to arrive at knowledge of these different conceptualities
and their philosophical significance. The most plausible answer, I want to suggest, is that
knowledge of these different conceptualities and their philosophical significance presupposes a
cognitive perspective whose goal is more the assessment of the manner of cognizing the objects
operative in the paradigmatic mathematical and philosophical cognition of the ancient Greeks
and early moderns than in these objects themselves. Such a cognitive perspective is, following
Kant, appropriately characterized as transcendental, because its guiding interest is not in the
mathematician and philosophers knowledge per se but in knowing how the cognition operative
in their kinds of knowledge comes about.
Critique of the Ancient Mode of Mathematical and

Philosophical Cognition
Kleins account of Platos and Aristotles controversy over the mode of being proper to the
generality of the objects of mathematical and philosophical cognition can be seen to demonstrate
that despite this controversy their modes of thought share a common conceptuality. Thus for
both thinkers the generality of the objects of mathematical and philosophical cognition always
refer immediately to multitudes of objects: individual sensible and intelligible objects in the case
of the objects of mathematical cognition and singular eidetic objects in the case of philosophical
cognition. And it is precisely Kleins demonstration of this that permits our discerning a critical
moment, in the Kantian sense discussed above, in this demonstration. On the one hand, because
the generality of the concepts involved in the ancient Greek methods of mathematical and
philosophical cognition is inseparable from their relation to multitudes of individual objects,
these concepts and their objects may be critically characterized as first intentional. On the
other hand, because of the fundamentality of this critical relation, the concern of ancient Greek
philosophical theory with the account of the origin of these concepts and their relation to their
objects in the souls manner of cognizing both of these kinds of objects and relations may be
critically characterized as second intentional. And, finally, on both hands, the fundamental
distinction between first intentions and their objects and second intentions and their objects
in evidence here may be critically characterized as the basic structure of the ancient mode of
thought.
9
Jacob Klein, GMT, 171.
10
Jacob Klein, Modern Rationalism, in Lectures and Essays, Eds. Robert B. Williamson and Elliott
Zuckerman (Annapolis: St. Johns College Press, 1985), 53-64, here 64.
45
Kleins Account of Early Modern Mathematical and

Philosophical Cognition
Kleins account of early modern mathematical and philosophical cognition is made possible
by its comparison with that of the ancient Greeks. This comparison, in turn, is made possible by
the early modern thinkers relating their mathematical and philosophical discoveries to ancient
Greek precedents. In the case of mathematics, the early modern mathematicians understood,
for the most part, this relation to be one of continuity. The early modern philosophers, likewise,
understood their discoveries for the most part to be in continuity with the ancients.11 Thus
Franois Vieta understood the objects of his analytic method to be the same objects dealt with
by the ancients and he also understood this method itself to be based in an ancient precedent,
save for its greater generality than that exhibited by the ancients. And Ren Descartes, too, also
understood both his unification of ancient geometrical analysis with algebra and his establishment
of the mathesis universalis as the method of science to have an ancient precedent. Indeed, in both
of these paradigmatic cases of early modern thought, the difference between ancient and modern
science was understood in terms of the generality of the method employed and not the nature of
the objects investigated.
Thus Vieta understood his logistice speciosa as a method for investigating the same numbers
and geometrical forms investigated in ancient Greek mathematics, with the only difference being
that the generality of his method made explicit the very same method employed but not exhibited
for reasons of vanity by the ancient mathematicians. That is, Vieta was convinced, for instance,
that Diophantus Arithmetic had its basis in a method of calculation that didnt calculate with
determinate numbers but with their species, just as Vietas analytic art did, but that Diophantus
concealed this to the end of making his problem solving acuity appear more ingenious that it
really was.
Descartes, likewise, understood his analytic geometry both to investigate the same
mathematical objects as ancient mathematics and to employ its same universal method, which
method, however, the ancient mathematicians had concealed out of a kind of malicious cunning.
Moreover, he understood the employment of this method to be in the service of investigating
extension, which he took as the true substance of the beings of nature, the same natural beings
that his Schoolmen teachers had taught him Aristotle had investigated.
Kleins GMT demonstrates, however, that neither of these self-interpretations can withstand
critical scrutiny when both the objects and methods of ancient mathematics and philosophy
are understood from their own conceptual level. That is, Klein shows that both Vietas and
Descartes understanding of the nature of the mathematical objects of the ancients and Descartes
understanding of the true substance of the beings of nature are radically different than that of the
ancients. Klein shows precisely why this is the case by tracing the transformation of the concepts
of the objects of mathematics in Vieta and Descartes and the substance of nature that occurs in
Descartes by reconstructing the original cognition in which this transformation occurred.
11
See GMT, Part II and The World of Physics and the Natural World, 19-20. See also Origin, chs.
22-23.
46
Klein shows that Vietas introduction of a fundamental distinction between calculating with
equations whose coefficients are numbers and calculating with equations whose coefficients are
letters functioning as symbols12 of numbers and their powers, is the distinction at the basis of
Vietas belief that Diophantus was in the possession of the art of symbolic calculation but chose
to conceal that fact to make his calculating skill and acuity appear all the greater. Klein goes
on to show, however, that Vietas belief was mistaken. The mistake lies in Vietas interpretation
of the numerical signs as no longer referring directly to objects as they did for Diophantus and
ancient Greek mathematics, but to the general concept of each number. Thus, for instance, the
concept of two no longer has for Vieta its ancient Greek meaning of referring to two pure
monads, but rather it means the concept of being two in general. As a result, the numerical sign
2 no long means two determinate things as did for Diophantus and Greek mathematics but the
general character of this one number, which is to say its concept of twoness.
What made it possible for Vieta to think that Diophantus method of calculation was not
based in numbers but in a concealed logistic of symbols was his attribution of this understanding
of number to Diophantus. This understanding of number makes the move from calculation with
putative individual numbers to calculation with letter symbols appear logical, as the general
character of each number presupposes the general character of each and every number. Hence,
for instance, the logic of the replacement of 2 by a follows from the status of a as a sign that
represents number in general, for the symbolic relation between each sign and what it designates
is the same. That is, each letter directly represents a general concept twoness and number
in general and therefore only indirectly refers to a multitude of entities. Vietas innovation of
calculating with equations whose units are symbolic numbers, which for Klein makes him the
first creator of the algebraic formula,13 is therefore made possible by his identification of the
concept of number, that is, the concept of a multiplicity, with number itself, which is to say, with
a determinate multitude of determinate objects.
Descartes unification of ancient Greek geometrical analysis and algebra to establish
analytical geometry is conditioned by Vietas invention of algebraic formulae. Klein shows
that modern analysis is not the result of combining directly ancient geometrical analysis with
the ancient (Diophantine) theory of equations but rather the result of Descartes bringing the
symbolic interpretation and exhibition of both geometrical forms and arithmetical ratios together
in a manner that regards and sensibly exhibits their common general quantitative character. The
regarding of their common general quantitative character is the basis of the self-understanding
of modern algebra and mathesis universalis as having a general object that is neither a discrete
nor continuous magnitude as its proper matter of study, but rather a quantity in general. The
sensible exhibition of these general quantities occurs in the guise of an image that, in marked
contrast with the ancient Greek understanding of the presentation of images in mathematics,
does not refer to pure intelligible objects. Instead, these general qualities sensible exhibition is
the result of a universal procedure that transforms the indeterminate and therefore unimaginable
12
Vieta himself is the first to use the term symbol to refer to the letters that replace numbers and
their powers in equations.
13
The World of Physics and the Natural World, 25.
47
general object of analytical geometry into numerically determinate lengths and values. The
sensible image that results from this transformation refers therefore to a general procedure for
its construction, rather than to the procedure-less origin in which images appear to the soul in
sense perception.
Descartes formulates the relation of his method to ancient geometrical analysis in terms
of its generalization, by which he understood the more general or universal treatment of
geometrical forms than is explicitly found in ancient analysis. Thus, whereas the drawn figures
in ancient geometrical analysis exhibit as images particular geometrical forms, Descartes makes
it clear that the figures in analytical geometry exhibit only relations or proportions and indeed
assume exceedingly great generality (et quidem maxime generaliter sumptas). Descartes
presentation of these relations in line-segments thus functions, in the case of a single relation,
only to illustrate them clearly and simply for the senses and imagination and not to image a
pure geometrical form. And the facilitation of the methodically necessary surveying together
many such relations by representing them simultaneously with letters that signify ciphers, is, on
Kleins view, another mode of the very same symbolic style of presentation.14
By symbolic style of presentation Klein understands four things:
One, the figures drawn in analytical geometry do not represent pure geometrical forms and
therefore no longer have the status as their sensible images. Rather, these figures, for instance,
the coordinate-axes of an ellipse, apply not to the pure ellipse accessible only in thought, but
rather they only function as the symbols that methodically indicate the possible use of such a
pair of lines in general. Thus the symbolic significance of these lines becomes manifest when
they are understood in contrast to the ancient understanding of geometric diagrams, that is, when
they are no longer understood as sensibly perceived images that exhibit the intelligible being of
particular line segments investigated by ancient geometrical analysis but rather as illustrations
of the general procedure for investigating such line segments that is operative in this analysis.
Two, the generality of the symbolic figures of analytical geometry is understood in terms
of their variability, because general magnitudes are thought of as alterable. As such they are
detachable from the realm of determinate geometric objects and understood in their being
as general magnitudes in terms of their ability to take on, one after the other, all admissible
numerically determinate values. All the geometric figures investigated using the symbolic figures
of analytical geometry are from now on nothing but symbolic exhibitions of various possible
relations, or of the different functional relations, between two (or more) variables.15 These
figures ability to take on numerically determinate values allows the general magnitudes they
represent to replace both particular geometrical forms and particular numbers.
Three, the very being of the figures employed by analytical geometry was understood
by Descartes and is now ordinarily understood as the images of the geometrical forms exhibited
by the ancients. For instance, the ellipse originally drawn by Descartes within his methods
analytical coordinate-axes and now drawn within its Cartesian coordinates was understood
14
The World of Physics and the Natural World, 18.
15
Ibid, 19.
48
by him and is ordinarily understood today as the same ellipse treated by Apollonius. Precisely
this understanding is what permits the illustration of the generalization of the ancient theory
of equations (which dealt with numbers understood as determinate multitudes of determinate
objects) into algebra, or, to speak with Descartes, the unification of the geometrical analysis of
the ancients with modern algebra. This illustration takes the form of the transformation into an
image of the indeterminate general magnitudes treated by analytical geometry, an image that is
constructed by rendering determinate the universal values inseparable from such magnitudes.
And four, that what Descartes calls generalization is really a complex conceptual
process ascending from intention prima to intention secunda while, at the same time, identifying
these.16 Descartes, like Vieta before him, therefore failed to understand that the true nature of
his innovation was not to extend the scope of a general method already extant in ancient times
but to shift the meaning of the concept of magnitude from intention prima to intention secunda,
together with their simultaneous identification.17 Descartes analytical geometry accomplished
this shift for the continuous magnitude that characterized for the ancients the mode of being of
geometrical forms just as Vietas analytical art accomplished it for the discrete magnitude that
characterized for the ancients the mode of being of numbers. Indeed, it is precisely Vietas shift
of the meaning of magnitude in the realm of numbers that prepares the way for his logistice
speciosa to become a part of geometrical analysis, which is exactly what Descartes succeeded
in accomplishing.
The most immediate implication of Descartes failure to understood his methods
conceptual innovation in relation to its ancient precedent is manifest in his philosophical
identification of the concept of extensio with the extendedness of corporeal extension itself, that
is, with the extended beings belonging to nature. Here, in Descartes philosophy, the mathematical
possibility of identifying prima and secunda intention, which is based on the misidentification
of the symbolically exhibited image of geometrical objects with the geometrical images of the
ancients, can be seen to condition the philosophical possibility of identifying the being of a thing
with the methodical exhibition of its general concept. Thus, the non-conceptual objects to which
first intentional concepts are directed, as what is other than the concepts generality despite
their intelligibility nevertheless being inseparable from this generality, are identified with this
conceptual generality by Descartes following his innovative extension of the generality of the
second intentions that are the precise preoccupation of ancient philosophical theory. Descartes
therefore identifies that which both ancient mathematical and philosophical cognition keep
distinct, namely, the first intentional objects investigated by ancient science with the second
intentional objects and relations investigated by philosophical theory. Not just in Descartes
however is this identification made, but according to Klein the conceptual shift implicit in it
structurally determines the modern mode of thinking per se and with this, the symbolic unreality
of its cognitive achievements. And because of this the symbolic reason behind this mode of
thought stands in need of what Kant called the critique of pure reason.
16
Ibid., 20.
17
Ibid., 26.
49
Critique of Symbolic Reason
According to Klein, the symbolic exhibition of the general magnitudes in analytical geometry
is captured by Kant as the representation of a universal procedure of imagination in providing
an image for a concept (B 179), which Kant entitles the schema of this concept. However,
what Kant and the Neo-Kantians failed to recognize with respect to the symbolic exhibition made
possible by the schema is that It is no less essential18 that their identification of the schematically
constructed images with very same images exhibited by the ancient Greeks is a mistake. Kant and
the Neo-Kantians failed to recognize this because like the originators of the new mathematics,
they understood the generalization accomplished by symbolic algebra to be continuous with
the general method and formal objects of ancient Greek mathematics. Kants technical term for
this was amplification, by which is meant the enhancement of mathematical calculation in the
absence of its proper objects the discrete and continuous magnitudes of the Greeks. Symbolic
reason for Kant is therefore an extension of pure reason, in the sense that the formality of reasons
symbolic concepts are understood as more abstract than but nevertheless homogeneous and
therefore logically related to the formality of the pure concepts of pure reason.
It is precisely this understanding of symbolic reason that Kleins GMT demonstrates is
unfounded by comparing the conceptuality of the ancient mode of thinking with that of the
modern mode. The conceptuality of the symbolic concept of magnitude in general is improperly
understood as a formal concept that is homogenous with the formality of the formal concepts of
Greek mathematics, save for its greater level of abstraction. Kleins analysis of the structural
relations between first and second intentions and their objects in the ancient and modern modes
of thought provides the basis for exhibiting the lack of formal homogeneity between the abstract
formal objects of Greek mathematics and the generalized (formalized) objects of early modern
mathematics. The generalization that generates the symbolic concept magnitude in general
cannot be understood as an abstraction that is consistent with Greek (Aristotelian) abstraction,
save for its greater degree of disregard for and therefore abstraction from the qualities of its
object. Rather Kleins analysis show that the shift in the meaning of the formality of a concept in
modern mathematics from first to second intention together with the simultaneous identification
of first and second intentional objects precludes precisely the generation of the symbolic concept
of magnitude in general from Aristotelian abstraction. Abstraction in this sense is structurally
limited by the fundamental distinction between first and second intentions and first and second
intentional objects in the conceptuality characteristic of the ancient mode of thought. Because
of this the conceptuality of such thoughts second intentions and second intentional objects,
no matter how abstract, remain necessarily related to the non-conceptual objects of its first
intentions.
Klein calls the abstraction responsible for the generation of symbolic concepts symbolic
abstraction. He finds this kind of abstractions basic contours adumbrated in Descartess account
of the pure intellects abstraction of the concept of a multitude in general from its cognition of
a determinate multitude. Such Cartesian abstraction brings with it the consequent necessity of
18
Ibid., 19.
50
combining this indeterminate, because generalized, concept with a determinate mark in order for
the pure intellect to be able to represent to itself this concept. The combination of a determinate
mark with an indeterminate concept is the result of the pure intellect working in conjunction with
the imagination to use the latters power to make things visible, in this case, to make visible the
pure intellects indeterminate concepts. The result of this collaboration is the unification of the
indeterminacy of the formalized concept that is abstracted by the pure intellect (from its own
cognition of determinate mathematical objects) with the determinacy of a mark made visible to
the intellect by the imaginations representation of something that, strictly speaking, because of
its indeterminacy, is incapable of being represented. The unity brought about by this unification
is the mathematical symbol.
What makes this unity of indeterminate and determinate components a mathematical
symbol is the symbols visible embodiment of the modern shift in the meaning of the conceptuality
of a concept from first to second intention together with the simultaneous identification of these
intentions objects. The visibility of the algebraic letter that is combined with the formalized
concept is responsible for the letters status as the object of a first intention. As such, that is,
considered only as a visible letter, however, the letter is not yet a mathematical symbol. And it is
not a letter sign if by sign is understood a mark that signifies something other than itself through
this mark. In other words, an account of the condition of possibility for symbolic reason being
symbolic is something that is manifestly not provided by calling attention to the fact that such
reason employs symbols as signs of mathematical concepts. Rather, an account of the condition
of possibility of symbolic reason must first account for precisely this fact, namely, that letters
with otherwise no significative connection with mathematical objects are nevertheless recognized
as unambiguously having such a connection. It is precisely this condition of possibility, indeed
this transcendental condition of possibility, that Klein provides an account of by showing that
reasoning with mathematical symbols comes about when concepts of magnitude that relate only
to other concepts are simultaneously apprehended as the objects of first intentions, that is, as
non-conceptual beings. Thus, when this mark, 2, is apprehended as the number two, or when
this mark, a, is apprehended as a variable, reason is functioning symbolically. And Klein shows
that what makes these marks symbols is not their putative status as signs, but, rather, the other
way around: what makes them signs in the sense of mathematical symbols is their status as
marks that are inseparable from the mathematical objects that they represent.
This extraction from Kleins analysis of the transcendental conditions of the possibility of
the mathematical cognition in which the symbolic formalization of the objects of mathematics
originates sets the stage for the extraction of the transcendental conditions of the possibility for
the philosophical cognition in which the formalization of the objects of philosophical cognitions
originate. As in the case of the critique of mathematical cognition, Klein shows in the case
of philosophical cognition that the shift in conceptuality is recognized as such neither by its
originators nor by their followers down into the present. As a result, the shift from first to second
intentions together with the simultaneous identification of their objects initiated by Descartes
remains in effect to this day. This is not to say that one critical implication of Kleins GMT is
that philosophers since Descartes have been self-consciously Cartesian. Far from it; however, it
51
is to suggest that insofar as philosophical theory is understood as being capable of arriving at the
truth of the objects of its cognition by articulating their meaning as it is given in this cognition,
this understanding shares with Descartes the fundamental presupposition determinative of the
modern mode of thought. That is, such an understanding presupposes that the basic units of its
second intentional objects of meaning, however formulated and understood, are, in principle,
capable of becoming one with the non-conceptual objects of its first intentions.
Literature:
1. Aristotle . Metaphysics. Trans. Joe Sachs. 2nd ed. Santa Fe, N.M.: Green Lion, 2002
2. Jacob Klein, Die griechische Logistik und die Entstehung der Algebra in Quellen und
Studien zur Geschichte der Mathematik, Astronomie und Physik, Abteilung B: Studien, vol. 3,
no. 1 (1934), 18105 (Part I), and no. 2 (1936), 122235 (Part II); English translation: Greek
Mathematical Thought and the Origin of Algebra, trans. Eva Brann (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT
Press, 1969; reprint: New York: Dover, 1992), Hereafter GMT.
3. Kennington, Richard. Review of J. Klein, Lectures and Essays. Review of Metaphysics 41
(1987)
4. Burt C. Hopkins, The Origin of the Logic of Symbolic Mathematics. Edmund Husserl and
Jacob Klein (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2011), 306-12. (Hereafter Origin.)
5. Jacob Klein, Modern Rationalism, in Lectures and Essays, Eds. Robert B. Williamson and
Elliott Zuckerman (Annapolis: St. Johns College Press, 1985
6. Jacob Klein, The World of Physics and the Natural World, in Lectures and Essays, Eds.
Robert B. Williamson and Elliott Zuckerman (Annapolis: St. Johns College Press, 1985
7. Immanuel Kant, Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics, trans. Gary Hatfield (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2005).
8. Immanuel Kant, Critique of Pure Reason, trans. Norman Kemp Smith (New York: St Martins
Press, 1965).
52
barT s. hopkinsi
simboluri gonebis kritikis prologomenebi
iakob kleini naSromSi `berZnuli matematikuri azrovneba da algebris

warmoSoba~ miznad isaxavs moaxdinos Cveneba, Tu ra saxis `gadabmas~ aqvs ad-
gili antikuri berZnebis ricxvis konceptis transformaciisas Tanamedro-
ve konceptSi, romelic naTels xdis Tanamedrove konceptis struqturul
Sesustebas, Tu ras niSnavs iyo ricxvi. i.kleinis Tanaxmad, ricxvis berZnul
konceptSi ricxvi ganuyofelia erTeuli sagnebis simravlisagan, romelTa-
nac ricxvs pirdapiri mimarTeba aqvs. Tanamedrove konceptSi ricxvs ar aqvs
pirdapiri mimarTeba simravlesTan, aramed simravlis konceptTan, romli-
sagan yvelaferi abstragirebulia, daculia, rogorc niSani, romlis war-
modgena TviTon konceptis identuria.
avtoris mizania am gadasvlis farTo perspeqtivaSi ganxilva kantis
wminda gonebis `kritikis~ konceptiT mopovebuli gamadidebeli linzis
meSveobiT; mizania, pasuxi gavceT kiTxvas, Tu ras uwodebs kleini `simbo-
lur abstraqcias~, romelic pasuxs scems ricxvis Tanamedrove konceptis
geneziss. is SeiZleba davinaxoT ise, rogorc mas kanti axasiaTebs; rogorc
wminda gonebis `Sefaseba~. Cemi ganzraxvaa, wamoviwyo riskiani saqme, rasac
i.kleinis mixedviT minda vuwodo `simboluri goneba~. kantze miTiTebiT,
ar vfiqrob, rom i.kleini ricxvis konceptis Tavis istoriul-filosofiur
analizs gaigebda kantianur terminebSi.
avtors ar surs SemogvTavazos filosofiuri sistemis proeqti, ro-
melSic kantis mier artikulirebuli gonebis kritikis saWiroeba relevan-
turia i.kleinis mier Catarebuli analizis. me msurs kantis filosofiidan
gadmoviRo kritikis koncepti gagebuli, rogorc SemecnebiTi unarebis `Se-
faseba~, romelsac miznad ar aqvs Semecnebis gafarToeba, aramed mxolod
misi gawmenda surs. igi aris misi gaTavisufleba Secdomisagan. kantis Sem-
TxvevaSi gamosworeba gulisxmobs wminda gonebis sazRvrebis dadgenas, xo-
lo i.kleinis SemTxvevaSi simboluri gonebis Sefasebis gamosworeba misi
kritikis ganxorcielebiT bundovani rCeba.
kritika da istoriuli warmoSoba (gonebis unaris gaumjobesebis
ori gza gonebis kritika-Sefaseba da gonebis mier moxmarebuli koncepte-
bis warmoSobis garkveva).
kantis mier wamowyebuli wminda gonebis kritikis mamoZravebeli sti-
mulia rwmena, rom Semecnebis `daswavla~ SesaZlebelia; rom im koncepte-
bis warmoSobis SeswavliT, romlebic muSaoben Cveni Semecnebis procesSi,
SesaZlebelia maTi ukeT gamoyenebis gansazRvra. i. kleinis simboluri ab-
53
straqciis aRricxva iziarebs am mosazrebas. maTi interesis sagania, Tu ra

gansazRvravs Semecnebis unars Semecnebis saganTan mimarTebaSi.
radikaluri gansxvaveba kantis mosazrebaSi `TviTon wminda gonebis
unaris~ konceptis warmoSobaze da i. kleinis mosazreba simboluri abstraq-
ciis konceptis warmoSobis Sesaxeb warmoadgens gamowvevas kantis kritikis,
rogorc gamadidebeli SuSis gamoyenebis, legitimurobis dasabuTebisaT-
vis, rac dagvexmareba farTo perspeqtivaSi ganvixiloT i.kleinis mosazre-
ba. i. kleinisaTvis konceptis warmoSobis filosofiuri mniSvneloba ganu-
yofelia yvela konceptis sazrisis gaTvaliswinebisagan, romelic naTlad
istoriulia. kantisaTvis ki kritikis subieqtia TviTon wminda goneba, ro-
melic gagebulia rogorc araistoriuli. i.kleinTan ìstoriulma axsnam~
moipova ormagi paradoqsuli statusi. erTi mxriv, istoriulad daTariRe-
badi maTematikuri da filosofiuri teqstebi da maTi avtorebi moxazaven
maTematikuri konceptebis `formaluri~ sazrisis transformaciis gzas;
meore mxriv, am konceptebis warmoSoba istoriuli daTariRebadi faqtebi-
sagan ar aris gagebuli i. kleinis mier, rogorc ìstoriuli relatiuro-
bis~ safrTxe konceptebis formaluri sazrisis mimarT. kleini ar fiqrobs,
rom misi mimarTva maTematikuri konceptebis warmoSobis istoriulobaze
maT sazriss istoriulad relatiurs xdis. igi fiqrobs, rom maTematikuri
konceptebis formaluri sazrisis dasabuTeba (axsna) naTels xdis sazrisis
istoriul kategorias.
avtoris azriT, am istoriuli ormagi paradoqsis gadaWris gasaRebi
devs ìstoriis~ gansakuTrebuli Taviseburebis aRiarebaSi. istoriuli
axsnis paradigma warmodgeba faqtobrivi res gestae-dan (movlena, rac xdeba),
romelsac, ar SeiZleba iTqvas, rom, arc aucilebloba da arc formaluri
obieqturoba ar miekuTvneba. formaluri struqturis gamokvlevis dasru-
lebuli sazrisi, rogorc `formaluri~, aris mxolod intelgibeluri Se-
mecnebis gamokvlevis safuZvelze, romelSic aseTi formaluri struqtu-
ra Tavdapirvelad warmoiSoba. am SemTxvevaSi SekiTxvaSi formaluri saz-
risi aris ricxvis `ganzogadebuli~ anu terminologiurad ekvivalenturi
`formalizebuli~ koncepti da ricxvi zogadad nagulisxmevia Tanamedrove
algebris mier.
i. kleinisaTvis formalizebuli konceptis sruli sazrisi, romelic
pasuxia kiTxvaze, Tu ras da rogor aRniSnavs, rasac igi aRniSnavs, ar SeiZ-
leba dadgenil iqnes kvlavwarmoebis, anda kvlavwarmoebis mcdelobis ga-
reSe. Semecnebis sawyisi awarmoebs maT gansakuTrebul formalur sazrisi-
seul daxasiaTebas, rogorc `formalizebuli~ koncepti. am sawyisis Semec-
neba, rasac i. kleini mimarTavs, rogorc `simbolur abstraqcias~ da romel-
sac igi asabuTebs, filosofiurad miuwvdomelia, ramdenadac `formaluri~
da àbstraqtulis~ sazrisi aRebulia, rogorc istoriulad invariantuli,
54
berZnebidan dawyebuli dRemde. marTlac, i. kleinisaTvis es filosofiuri

miuwvdomloba orive wesiT muSaobs, rogorc berZnebis gageba `formalu-
ris~ da àbstraqtulis~.
TavSi `kritikuli gansxvaveba maTematikur da filosofiur Semecnebas
Soris~ avtori aanalizebs ormag paradoqsul mimarTvas istoriisadmi kle-
inis naSromSi, romelic legitimurs xdis kantis wminda gonebis kritikis
konceptis gamoyenebas, rogorc saTvaleebis, raTa ganvixiloT ZiriTadi
daskvna azrovnebis wesis cvlilebis farTo perspeqtivaSi antikurobidan
`modernamde~. mis wignSi SeiZleba SevxvdeT istoriis arakonvencionaluri
sazrisis Tematizebas. sazrisi, sapirispirod konvencionaluri dapirispi-
rebisa empiriuli istoriis SemTxveviT xasiaTsa da azrovnebis araSemTxve-
viT formalur obieqtebs Soris, adgens istoriul kategoriebs Tanamed-
roves da antikurs, romelSic, miuxedavad imisa, rom eqvemdebareba daTari-
Rebas, mainc gamoiyofa konceptualuri Sinaarsis erTianoba, romelic ar
aris empiriuli istoriis SemTxveviTobis xasiaTis cvlilebis subieqti.
kleinis maTematikuri obieqtebis istoriuli genealogiisaTvis para-
doqsi aucilebeli niSania, romelic, rogorc obieqti, aris namdvili saz-
risis floba; is ar SeiZleba metad dapirispirebuli iyos istoriis konven-
cionalur sazrisTan. is ar gadawydeba maTi moSorebiT, aramed aRiarebiT
Rrma paradoqsisa, romelsac pretenzia aqvs moaxdinos misi demonstrireba
genealogiis meSveobiT.
es aris Rrma paradoqsi anu, ufro zustad, paradoqsis SesaZlebloba.
gTavazobT, sakiTxi ganvixiloT kantis Semecnebis kritikis konceptis Car-
CoSi. ueWvelia, araa SemTxveviTi, rom kantis wminda gonebis kritikis cen-
traluri fokusi dainteresebulia gansxvavebiT wminda gonebis mier koncep-
tebis maTematikur da filosofiur gamoyenebas Soris. kanti fiqrobs, rom
maTematikuri codnis àpodiqtikuri~ xasiaTi, misi ori niSniT: aucileblo-
biT da utyuarobiT, gvaZlevs mosaxerxebel standarts wminda gonebis mier
konceptebis filosofiuri gamoyenebis Sesafaseblad. amitomaa, rom filo-
sofiaSi da maTematikaSi Semecneba Seicavs konceptebs, romlis sazrisi ar
aris warmoSobili grZnobadi aRqmidan. mxolod maTematikaSi aris Semecneba
mecnierulad TviT evidenturi, romelSic araa saWiro gamoyenebuli iyos
araviTari sxva SemecnebiTi avtoriteti, garda TviTon maTematikisa, raTa
aRiarebul iqnes misi, rogorc mecnierebis, statusi. amis sapirispirod,
kantis azriT, filosofia cud mdgomareobaSia, radgan unda moaxdinos sa-
kuTari mecnieruli statusis gamarTleba. rac misTvis misi Sesaferisi Se-
mecnebiTi uflebebis dacvas niSnavs.
filosofia da maTematika gansxvavdeba ara maTi pativiscemiT Semecne-
bis formebisadmi da ara maTi Semecnebis sagnebis an masalis gamo. maSasada-
me, kantis TvalsazrisiT, filosofia swavlobs sidideebs iseve, rogorc ma-
55
Tematika. am SemTxvevaSi maT saerTo sagani aqvT, magram gonebiT gamokvle-

vis saxe filosofiur da maTematikur ganxilvaSi sruliad gansxvavebulia.
filosofia misdevs mxolod zogad cnebebs, maTematika ki marto cnebebiT
verafers gaawyobs, amitom maSinve miaSurebs xolme mWvretelobas, romel-
Sic is cnebas ganixilavs konkretulobaSi, magram ara empiriulad, aramed
iseTSi, romelsac igi apriori warmoadgens, romelic aago da romelSic
imas, rac konstruqciis zogadi pirobebidan gamomdinareobs, sazogadod
Zala unda qondes konstruirebuli cnebis obieqtis mimarT (B743). filoso-
fiuri Semecneba iyenebs wminda gonebis kuTvnil universalur konceptebs
erTeuli sagnebis gasagebad, romlebic ar ekuTvnis wminda gonebas, xolo
maTematikuri Semecneba, romelic aseve iyenebs wminda gonebis universalur
konceptebs, miuxedavad amisa, moqmedebs imgvarad, rom qmnis erTeuli obi-
eqtis arsebobas, rac Seadgens am Semecnebis Sinaarss. is, rac SesaZlebelia
maTematikuri SemecnebisaTvis, SeuZlebelia filosofiuri SemecnebisaT-
vis, saxeldobr, codnis buneba gansazRvrulia wminda konceptis mier. Cemi
azriT, Tu rogor muSaobs es gamijvna, kantTan nakleb mniSvnelovania, vid-
re kritikuli Tvalsazrisis statusi. kleini agrZelebs mcdelobas, daa-
fuZnos filosofiuri Semecneba maTematikuri da filosofiuri Semecnebis
gansxvavebaze. marTlac, istoriuli relatiuroba, rac axasiaTebs azrov-
nebis am or models, qmnis paradoqss. mogiwodebT yuradReba miaqcioT imas,
ris Cvenebasac isaxavs miznad kleini da romlis farTo perspeqtiva msurs
gaviazro kantianuri kritikis CarCoebSi. kleinis analizSi azrovnebis mo-
delebis istoriuli determinacia gviCvenebs, rom antikuri saberZneTis da
Tanamedroveobis koncepts azrovnebis formaluri obieqtis Sesaxeb, maTi
Sesabamisi Semecnebis modelebTan erTad, araferi aqvT saerTo.
paragrafSi `Semecnebis antikuri da Tanamedrove modelebis SeuTav-
sebloba~ kleini afuZnebs `SesaZleblobas~ iseTi konceptualuri SeuTav-
seblobisa, rogoricaa SeuTavsebloba berZnul da Tanamedrove konceptebs
Soris. amisaTvis iyenebs im niSnebs, rac axasiaTebs ZiriTadi konceptebis ga-
moyenebas filosofiur da maTematikur SemecnebaSi. amgvarad irkveva, erTi
mxriv, konceptis mimarTeba imasTan, rac misgan gansxvavebulia da, maSasada-
me, imasTan, rac arakonceptualuria; meore mxriv, sakiTxi Suqdeba koncep-
tis mimarTebiT meore konceptTan. kleini axorcielebs Semowmebas orive
aspeqtiT. axal droSi vlindeba Zireuli gansxvavebebi. igi am gansxvavebis
artikulirebas axdens sqolastikuri enis gamoyenebiT, rogorc pirvel da
meore intencias. pirveli intencia axdens gonebis yofierTan mimarTebis
artikulirebas, romelic aris upiratesi gonebis mier mis gacnobierebas-
Tan, cnebasTan SedarebiT; meore intencia axdens gonebis mimarTebis arti-
kulacias im arsebulTan, romelic arsebobs mxolod rogorc misi gacnobi-
erebis Sedegi. `pirveli intenciis~ obieqti aris arsebuli, romelic pirda-
56
pir gagebadia gonebis konceptis meSveobiT, im konceptisagan gansxvavebiT.

roca `meore intenciis~ obieqti aris gagebadi gonebis konceptiT, rogorc
arsebuli damokidebulia sxva konceptze. kleini akeTebs Tamam ganacx-
ads. antikuri filosofiis da maTematikis cnebiToba gansazRvrulia misi
struqturuli gansxvavebiT pirvel da meore intencias Soris. axali drois
maTematikis da filosofiis cnebiToba gansazRvrulia misi struqturuli
identifikaciiT. aqedan gamomdinareobs am ori konceptualizaciis SeuTav-
sebadoba.
es Tamami ganacxadi maSinve wamoWris or kiTxvas: pirveli, raSi mdgo-
mareobs am gadanacvlebis maTematikuri da filosofiuri mniSvneloba? me-
ore, rogor aris SesaZlebeli codna amis Sesaxeb, ra unda iTqvas, Tu ro-
mel konceptualur perspeqtivas rTavs nebas kleini, Semecnebis dayvaniT
SeuTavsebel struqturul gansxvavebaze antikur berZnebsa da axali drois
azrovnebis modelebs Soris? pirveli kiTxvis pirvel nawilze pasuxis gace-
ma Zalzed advilia, radgan kleinisaTvis maTematikuri mniSvneloba aris am
gadanacvlebis simboluri algebris gamogoneba, romelic Teoriul-logis-
tikuria, romlis Zireuli erTeuli aris gonivruli Sifri da werili, rac
moucilebelia sididis konceptisagan da ariTmetikulad da geometriulad
ganusazRvrelia. am ganusazRvrelobas aqvs cvladis `zogadi konceptis~
axali statusi. rac Seexeba am gadanacvlebis filosofiur mniSvnelobas,
Znelia zustad ganisazRvros, radgan kleiniseuli artikulacia orgvaria.
es cvlileba konceptualizaciaSi SesaZlebels xdis adreuli axali drois
maTematikis dafuZnebas, rac niSnavs pirveli da meore intenciis struqtu-
rul identifikacias da, maSasadame, aseve maTi obieqtebis identifikacias;
aseve moicavs konceptualobis adreuli transformaciis Sesatyvis filo-
sofiur meTods da Teorias. meore mxriv, axali mecniereba SesaZlebelia
Tanamedrove algebris, maTematikuri fizikis gamogonebiT, romelic Tavis
Tavs moiazrebs, rogorc berZnuli filosofiis Teoriis da meTodis kano-
nier memkvidres. metic, kleinisaTvis Taviseburi konceptualoba gansazR-
vravs simbolur gonebas, rac SesaZlebels xdis Tanamedrove maTematikas da
aseve uSualod gansazRvravs `Tanamedrove cnobierebis~ konceptualobas;
gansazRvravs socialur da ekonomikur warmoebas, romelSic is miemarTeba
mas, rogorc `simbolur ararealobas~, romelic Tumca SeiZleba `gadala-
xul~ iqnes imis gagebiT, Tu rogoria àntikuri mecnierebis midgoma samyaro-
sadmi~. rac Seexeba meore kiTxvas: kleinisaTvis rogor aris SesaZlebeli
misvla gansxvavebuli konceptualuri sistemebis gansxvavebis codnasTan
da rogoria misi filosofiuri mniSvneloba? yvelaze ufro damajerebe-
li pasuxi, romelic minda SemogTavazoT, aris is, rom codna am gansxvavebu-
li konceptualuri sistemebis Sesaxeb da maTi filosofiuri mniSvneloba
gulisxmobs SemecnebiT perspeqtivas, romlis mizania ufro zusti Sefaseba
57
obieqtis Semecnebis manerisa, romelic moqmedebs antikuri berZnebis da ad-

reuli axali drois paradigmatul maTematikur da filosofiur Semecneba-
Si. kanti aseT Semecnebas axasiaTebs rogorc `transcendentalurs~, radgan
mas ainteresebs uSualod ara maTematikuri da filosofiuri codna, ara-
med, rogor moqmedebs Semecneba codnaSi.
kleinis Tanaxmad, simboluri warmoCena zogadi cvladis analitikur
geometriaSi kantis mieraa wvdomili. `warmodgenas warmosaxvis unaris im
zogad wesze, riTac cnebas misi xati Seeqmneba, am cnebis sqemas vuwodeb~,
romelsac kanti `gansjis cnebis sqemas~ uwodebs. Tumca, rasac kanti da ne-
okantianeloba mcdarad Seicnobs, pativiscemiT simbolur Cvenebad SesaZ-
lebels xdis sqema, romelic ar aris arsebiTobas moklebuli; romelic ax-
dens mis identifikacias xatis sqematuri konstruirebiT. bevri msgavsi xa-
tis warmoCeniT Zvel berZnebTan aris Secdoma. kants da neokantianelebs ar
SeuZliaT amis aRiareba, radgan, axali maTematikis Semqmnelebis msgavsad,
isini `generalizacias~ gaigeben simboluri algebris mier dasrulebulad,
rogorc antikuri saberZneTis maTematikis zogadi meTodis da formaluri
obieqtis meSveobiT gagrZelebas. kanti amisaTvis iyenebs teqnikur termins
àmplikacia~, romliTac igi fiqrobs maTematikuri aRricxvis gaumjobese-
bas misi Sesatyvisi obieqtis berZnebis diskretuli da mudmivi sididis
ararsebobis pirobebSi.
maSasadame, kantisaTvis simboluri goneba aris wminda gonebis gafar-
Toeba, im azriT, rom gonebis simboluri konceptis formaloba gagebulia
ufro abstraqtulad, vidre wminda gonebis wminda koncepti. ufro zustad,
kleinTan simboluri gonebis gageba axedens imis demonstrirebas, rom es da-
usabuTebelia azrovnebis antikuri modelis konceptualobis Sedarebis
gziT Tanamedrove azrovnebis modelTan. `zogadad sididis~ simboluri
konceptis konceptualoba Seusabamod aris gagebuli, rogorc formalu-
ri koncepti, rac homogenuria berZnuli maTematikis formaluri koncep-
tis formalurobasTan, Senaxulia maTi abstraqciis maRali done. azrov-
nebis antikur da axali drois modelebs Soris, pirvel da meore intenciebs
da maT obieqtebs Soris struqturuli mimarTebis kleiniseuli analizi
qmnis safuZvels, rom davinaxoT nakli formaluri homogenurobisa berZnu-
li maTematikis abstraqtul, formalur obieqtebsa da axali drois maTe-
matikis generalizebul obieqtebs Soris. generalizacia, rac warmoqmnis
simbolur koncepts `sidide zogadad~ SeuZlebelia gagebul iqnes, ro-
gorc abstraqcia, romelic Tavsebadia aristoteles abstraqciasTan. kle-
inis analizi aCvenebs, rom cvlileba konceptis formalurobaSi, cvlileba
Tanamedrove maTematikaSi pirvelidan meore intenciisaken da imavdrou-
li identifikaciiT pirveli da meore intenciis obieqtebisa, gamoricxavs
aristoteleseuli abstraqciidan `zogadad sidide~ simboluri koncep-
58
tis warmoSobas. kleini àbstraqcias~ acxadebs pasuxismgeblad `simbolu-

ri abstraqciis~ warmoSobaSi. igi aseTi saxis abstraqcias naxulobs dekar-
tes wminda inteleqtis abstraqciaSi konceptis ganzogadebaSi simravlis
cognition-idan. aseTi kartezianuli abstraqcia Seicavs Tanmimdevrul au-
cileblobas, gaaerTianos es ganusazRvreloba, radgan generalizebulia
cneba Tavisi ganmsazRvreli niSniT wminda inteleqtisaTvis, raTa hqondes
SesaZlebloba warmoadginos es koncepti. ganmsazRvreli niSnis kombinacia
ganusazRvrel konceptTan aris Sedegi wminda inteleqtis muSaobisa warmo-
saxvasTan kavSirSi da iyenebs ukanasknelis Zalas, warmoidginos sagnebi xi-
lulad. am SemTxvevaSi wminda inteleqtis ganusazRvrel konceptebs xdis
xilulad. am TanamSromlobis Sedegia wminda inteleqtis mier abstragire-
buli formalizebuli konceptis (TviT sakuTari Semecnebidan gamomdina-
re, gansazRvruli maTematikuri obieqtebi) ganusazRvrelobis unifikacia
niSnis gansazRvrulobasTan, rac inteleqtma xiluli gaxada raRacis war-
mosaxviTi reprezentaciis meSveobiT. mkacrad rom vTqvaT, rasakvirvelia,
igi misi ganusazRvrelobis gamo, ar aris SemZle iyos warmodgenili. erTo-
ba, warmomdgari am unifikaciidan, aris maTematikuri simbolo. is, rac qmnis
gansazRvruli da ganusazRvreli komponentebis erTianobas maTematikur
`simbolod~, aris simbolos xiluli ganxorcieleba im Tanamedrove cvli-
lebisa, romelic xdeba konceptis konceptualobis sazrisSi pirvelidan
meore intenciisaken da, imavdroulad, erTdrouli identifikaciiT am in-
tenciebis obieqtebisa. algebruli niSnis xiluloba, rac aris gaerTiane-
ba formalizebul konceptTan, pasuxismgebelia niSnis statusze, rogorc
pirveli intenciis obieqtze; rogorc aseTi, gaTvaliswinebulia rogorc
xiluli niSani, Tumca, niSani jer kidev ar aris maTematikuri simbolo. es ar
aris dawerili niSani, Tu dawerilis qveS gavigebT aRniSvnas, romelic aR-
niSnavs raRac sxvas da ara Tavis Tavs am aRniSvnis meSveobiT. sxva sityvebiT,
pirobebis gaTvaliswineba simboluri gonebis SesaZleblobebisaTvis, iyos
`simboluri~, aris raRac, rac cxadad ar aris uzrunvelyofili yuradR-
ebis miqceviT im faqtze, rom aseTi goneba muSaobs aseTi `simboloebiT~,
rogorc maTematikuri konceptebis aRniSvniT. sasurvelia, rom simbolu-
ri gonebis SesaZleblobis pirobebis gaTvaliswineba iyos im faqtis gaTva-
liswineba, rom dawerili niSani sxvagvar umniSvnelo kavSirSia maTematkur
obieqtebTan. es aris miniSneba aseTi calsaxa kavSiris arsebobisa. ufro
zustad, SesaZleblobis piroba, faqtobrivad, am SesaZleblobis `transcen-
dentaluri~ piroba, rasac kleini iTvaliswinebs imis CvenebiT, rom maTema-
tikuri simboloebiT msjeloba cvladis konceptiT imavdroulad gagebu-
lia, rogorc pirveli intenciis obieqti, rac aris arakonceptualuri ar-
seboba. roca aRniSvna `2~ aris gagebuli rogorc ricxvi ori, an, rodesac
aRniSvna à~ aris gagebuli rogorc xiluli À~, maSin goneba funqcionirebs
59
simbolurad. kleini aCvenebs, rom, rac qmnis aRniSvnas simbolod, ar aris

misi, rogorc werilobiTi niSnis, moCvenebiTi statusi, aramed, rac qmnis
mis sign-s maTematikur simbolod, aris misi statusi, rogorc aRniSvna (mark),
romelic aris ganuyofeli misi maTematikuri obieqtidan, romelsac is war-
moadgens.
kleinis analizidan maTematikuri Semecnebis SesaZleblobis tran-
scendentaluri pirobebis gamoyofisas, maTematikuri obieqtis simbolu-
ri formalizacia warmoSobs da amzadebs niadags filosofiuri Semecnebis
SesaZleblobis transcendentaluri pirobebis gamoyofisaTvis, romelSic
xdeba filosofiuri Semecnebis obieqtis formalizeba. iseve, rogorc ma-
Tematikuri Semecnebis kritikis SemTxvevaSi, filosofiuri Semecnebis Sem-
TxvevaSic kleini aCvenebs, rom dRes konceptualobis cvlileba ar aris
aRiarebuli, rogorc aseTi, arc misi Semoqmedebis da arc misi mimdevrebis
mier. rogorc Sedegi, cvlileba pirveli intenciidan meorisaken, maTi obi-
eqtebis imavdroul identifikaciasTan erTad, inicirebuli dekartes mier,
dResac ZalaSia. ar SeiZleba iTqvas, rom kleinis Sexedulebis erTi kriti-
kuli implikaciaa, rom filosofosebi dResac, dekartedan moyolebuli,
TviTcnobierad iyvnen kartezianelebi. sruliadac ara, Tumca, unda vivara-
udoT, rom, ramdenadac filosofiuri Teoria gagebulia, rogorc unaris
mqone, miaRwios obieqtTa WeSmaritebas, maTi sazrisis artikulirebiT, ro-
gorc is aris mocemul SemTxvevaSi, dekartesTan erTad im fundamentur wi-
naswar varauds iziarebs, romelic gansazRvravs azrovnebis Tanamedrove
wess. amgvarad, aseTi gageba winaswar varaudobs ZiriTadi erTeuli meoradi
intencionaluri obieqtebis sazriss, Tumca, formulirebuli, gagebuli
da principulad SemZlea gaxdes igiveobrivi pirveli intencionalobis ara-
konceptualur obieqtTan.
60
valerian ramiSvili
adamianis yofiereba riskis epoqaSi da adamianis Rirsebis

sakiTxi
adamianis winaSe dgas safrTxe, daikargos rogorc pirovneba, daikar-

gos rogorc ganumeorebeli da dakargos sakuTari Tavi. es aris riski, ver
gamoavlinos sakuTari Tavi, ar iyos, ar gaiazros sakuTari ganumeorebloba
da pirovnuloba. igi SeiZleba iyos Tavisufali, magram adamianis Tavisuf-
leba ver iqca sikeTis samsaxurad. nicSesTan Tavisufleba lomis niSania,
amitom iqca igi Zalauflebisadmi nebis gamovlinebad da es Tavisufleba
vlindeba eqscesSi da TviTnebobaSi. Tavisufleba iqca TviTnebobad Sinaga-
ni pasuxismgeblobis gareSe, refleqsiis gareSe da mas mxolod samarTali
zRudavs. igi ormag presSia moqceuli esaa manipulacia da politkoreqtu-
loba. igi ver axdens refleqsias sakuTar me-ze, imdenad CarTulia mediis,
reklamis, imijis manipulaciaSi. igi met mzaobas acxadebs iyos masis wevri,
vidre iyos pirovneba.
adamiani dgas dilemis winaSe risTvis unda izrunos man, ra unda iyos
misi yofierebis orientiri: Tavisuflebis aRiareba, pasuxismgeblobis kis-
reba sakuTar Tavze Tu RirsebisaTvis brZola. samarTali-zneobis dapi-
rispireba gadawyda samarTlis sasargeblod. xdeba samarTlis ontologi-
zacia. adamianis yofiereba aRiwereba mxolod samarTlebrivad da arsebobs
mxolod is, rac samarTlebriv dafiqsirebas eqvemdebareba. TviTon adamiani
arsebobs mxolod rogorc samarTlis subieqti an obieqti.
adamians ikvlevs uamravi mecniereba, arsebobs uamravi codna adamia-
nis Sesaxeb, magram TviTon calkeuli adamiani nakleb fiqrobs Tavis Tavze.
mas gamokvlevebi eubneba, Tu ra aris adamiani da cdilobs am niSnebis aRmo-
Cenas sakuTar TavSi. adamianis moqmedebas warmarTavs ara zneoba, ara gonie-
reba, aramed interesi, survili, aracnobieri da mainc acxadebs, rom is aris
adamiani, zneobrivi arseba. adamiani ara marto mokvda, aramed adamianma da-
karga da daiviwya Tavisi Tavi.
Tanamedrove adamianis winaSe dgas sokratuli problema. istoriuli
situacia adamianisagan moiTxovs daufiqrdes da Tavis Tavze aiRos sakuTari
zneobrivi yofierebis uzrunvelyofis problema. oRond, es ar aris gamow-
veuli RirebulebaTa krizisiT, aramed Tavisuflebis siWarbisa da multi-
kulturuli da, amave dros, globaluri samyaros arsebobiT. globaluroba
niSnavs erTiani kanonis dadgenas, xolo multikulturizmi Tavisuflebas
da RirebulebaTa sistemis mravalferovnebas gulisxmobs. amitom adamiani
dgas arCevanis winaSe, Tu romeli standartis mixedviT moiqces daemorCi-
61
los erTian normas, romelic SeiZleba iyos mxolod samarTlebrivi norma,

Tu moiqces sakuTari RirebulebiTi da zneobrivi normebis mixedviT?
xdeba zneobriobis sruli Canacvleba legaluri, wesieri, kanonmorCi-
li moqmedebiT, romlis wesebi erTiania da garedan aris Tavs moxveuli. zne-
obrioba daiqsaqsa profesiul eTikebad, kulturul da zneobriv standar-
tebad da individualuri qcevis wesebad. amitom saWiroa Sen mainc iyo dar-
wmunebuli sakuTari moqmedebis zneobriv xasiaTSi, romelic Sen mier aris
gaazrebuli da dafuZnebuli gonierebis, farTo gagebiT, principebidan ga-
momdinare, sadac goniereba adamianurobis aucilebeli elementia da ara
formaluri racionaloba, sadac goniereba yofierebaze azrovnebas gulis-
xmobs. samarTlis gabatoneba xom ar miuTiTebs, rom adamiani Sedis krizisis
zonaSi, rac adamianur yofierebas kidev ufro myifes gaxdis da aucilebeli
iqneba wesrigisa da adamianurobis minimumis SenarCuneba samarTliT.
zneobrivi standartebi aravis sakuTreba ar unda iyos, ris safuZvel-
zec erTi ganikiTxavs meores, magram adamianma is mainc unda icodes, rom
adamiani Cadis arazneobriv saqciels da daexmaros mas. adamianma unda ico-
des, ra arsebobs da ra aris arsebobis Rirsi. SeinarCuno adamianoba sul uf-
ro rTuli xdeba.
deficituri samyaro da `RmerTis sikvdilis~ fenomenis Semdeg go-
nivruli egoizmi yvelaze mSvidobiani formaa Tanaarsebobis, romelic gan-
sxvavdeba agresiuli Zalauflebisadmi nebisgan.
Tavisufleba aris Tavisufleba, aiRo pasuxismgebloba da ara Ta-
visufleba, iyo Zalauflebisadmi neba. pasuxismgeblobis done unda iyos
ganmsazRvreli adamianis Sefasebisa da socialur ierarqiaSi yofnisa. go-
nivrul egoizms unda daupirispirdes gonivruli pasuxismgebloba da ara
msxverplSewirva.
Tanamedrove adamiani ar aris masis adamiani, rogorc es gasetis miaC-
nda, arc gaucxoeba aris am adamianis yofnis wesi, arc absurdia adamianis
arsebobis wesi. Tanamedrove adamianis cxovrebis wesi globaluria. misi
problemaa arCevanis problema: sqesis, enis, kulturis, erovnebis, cxovre-
bis wesis, religiurobis arCevani. man unda airCios da gadawyvitos, Tu ra-
tom unda iyos romelime erisa Tu kulturis warmomadgeneli da ratom unda
airCios raime sxva. es misi pasuxismgeblobis sakiTxia. es simravle warmo-
Sobs arsebobis problemas, ras niSnavs arseboba da ras niSnavs WeSmariteba.
mas eSinia ar SeeSalos arCevani, ar daikargos.
dRes gansakuTrebuli yuradReba da interesi mimarTulia socialur
da politikur problemebze, vidre sulier problemebze. es mianiSnebs su-
lieri problemis devalvacias adamianis problemaTa rigSi. sulieri prob-
lema, iseve rogorc adre religiis problema, kerZo anu sindisis sakiTxi
xdeba. es aris problema, romelic dgas adamianis winaSe da es problema pi-
radad misi gadasawyvetia. es misi problemaa.
62
valerian ramiSvili _ adamianis yofiereba riskis epoqaSi da adamianis Rirsebis sakiTxi
Tanamedrove adamianis yofierebis orientiria: adamianis keTildRe-

oba da Tavisufleba; gulisxmobs piradi warmatebis kults simdidris,
gavlenis, Zalauflebis zrdas da emyareba `Zalauflebisadmi nebis~ Tavi-
suflebas. ramdenad emTxveva da pasuxobs es lozungi adamianis yofierebis
namdvil sazriss? keTildReoba da piradi warmateba, Tavisuflebis ganxor-
cieleba unda daemyaros Rirsebas da pasuxismgeblobis kisrebas sakuTar
Tavze.
SeiZleba iTqvas, rom Tanamedroveoba naklebad fiqrobs da ar inte-
resdeba Rirsebis problemiT, Tumca bevrs laparakoben meritokratiaze.
Zalaufleba yvelaze metad ibrZvis adamianis Rirsebis winaaRmdeg, radgan
Zalauflebisadmi neba Tavis mtrad aRiarebs swored Rirsebas, romelic ar
emorCileba misi totaluri batonobis survils. amas emateba isic, rom ada-
miani uars ambobs Tavis Rirsebaze Tavisi biosocialuri bunebis sasargeb-
lod. Rirseba aris adamianis Tavisuflebis, pirovnulobisa da pasuxismgeb-
lobis safuZveli, radgan Rirsebis gareSe adamiani kargavs adamianurobas.
dRes adamianad yofna niSnavs: ara subieqtad yofnas, Zalauflebisadmi
nebad yofnas, Tavisuflad yofnas, aramed pasuxismgeblad yofnas da Rirse-
bis mqoned yofnas. bednierebis, warmatebis da Rirsebis principis dapiris-
pireba ganmsWvalavs Tanamedrove adamianis cxovrebas.
meritokratiis upiratesobad miiCneven inteleqtis koeficients (I),
praqtikul sibrZnes (), romlis Sedegia praqtikuli sargebeli. Ta-
namedrove adamianis yofnis wesis erT-erTi umniSvnelovanesi niSani da kri-
zisis gamoxatuleba aris Rirsebis deficiti. amis safuZvelia is, rom adami-
anma daiviwya Rirseba, rac yofierebis daviwyebis uSualo Sedegia. amitom
problema aris adamianuri Rirsebis dafuZneba. rogor da raze SeiZleba
dafuZndes TviTon adamianis Rirseba? kamiu adamianis Rirsebas afuZnebs
adamianur amboxze, rac gulisxmobs RmerTis mcnebebis mixedviT cxovre-
bas, miuxedavad imisa, rom RmerTi miRmuri gaxda da ar pasuxobs adamians.
meritokratiis Rirseba emyareba kritikul azrovnebas da ara yofierebaze
azrovnebas.
haidegerisaTvis adamianis Rirseba ar aris moralur-zneobrivi gan-
sazRvreba, aramed adamianis eqsistencialur-ontologiuri ganmartebaa,
romelic gansazRvravs adamianis Rirsebis ontiur gagebas. Rirseba ar aris
adamianis xasiaTis Tviseba an unari, aramed Rirseba aris yofierebis wesi da
gagebis forma, samyaroSi yofnis wesi. me ar maqvs Rirseba, aramed me varse-
bob Rirsebis yofnis wesiT. Rirseba, rogorc gageba, sxvanairad gaxsnis sam-
yaros da adamianis adgils samyaroSi. Tu sindisi aris yofierebis Zaxili,
maSin Rirseba aris Cumi Zala da gabeduleba iyo Rirsebis yofnis wesiT. es ar
aris arc hard power da arc soft power, romelic axasiaTebs masas anda socialur
institutebs, aramed Cumi Zala, romelsac sakuTar TavSi grZnob. es aris
63
`Zala uZaloTa~, rac gaZlevs unars daupirispirde hard power da soft power da
darwmunebuli iyo Sens simarTleSi da Sens zneobriobaSi. es Cumi Zala da si-
mamace emyareba yofierebaze azrovnebas, ris safuZvelzec xar yofierebis
mezobeli da mcveli. es ganiWebs `Zalas~ iyo Rirsebis wesiT myofi.
iyav Tavisufali! es mowodeba rom ganaxorcielo, unda SegeZlos
Tavisufali azrovneba yofierebis WeSmaritebaze. am azrovnebidan yve-
laferi sxvagvarad Cans. es aris adamianuri Tavisuflebis metafizi-
kuri safuZveli. adamianis yofierebis azrovnebisaken dabruneba SesaZ-
lebelia da TviTon yofierebis WeSmaritebiTa da yofierebis xvedriT
ganisazRvreba. adamianis movaleoba da saqmea iyo mudam mzad gaiazro
yofierebis WeSmaritebis xdomileba.
haidegeri adamianis adamianurobas xedavs RirsebiT yofnaSi da ara go-
nier arsebad anda sociobiologiur arsebad yofnaSi, magram ra aris TviTon
Rirsebis safuZveli? haidegeri axorcielebs Rirsebis metafizikur-onto-
logiur dafuZnebas. igi adamianis Rirsebis safuZvels xedavs yofierebaze
azrovnebaSi. rogor unda davabrunoT adamiani yofierebis azrovnebasTan,
romelic absoluturi transcendenti da miRmuria, rodesac azrovneba da-
kavebulia mxolod arsebulebiT, rac vlindeba mecnierebis batonobaSi?
adamians egona, rom azrovnebda uSualod yofierebaze da aRmoCnda, cdebo-
da, rom ikisra metafizikuri naxtomis valdebuleba da mainc metafizikis
dasasrulis epoqis sekularizebul da desakralizebul realobaSi cxov-
robs; gadaitana `RmerTis sikvdili~ da RmerTi miRmuri gaxda, amitom masze
azrovneba SeuZleblad gamocxadda. adamianma uari Tqva RmerTis rwmenaze,
manam ki uari Tqva RmerTze azrovnebaze. adamianma daiviwya yofiereba, aRar
azrovnebs yofierebaze, rac Rirsebis daviwyebis uSualo mizezia. es yve-
laferi ganpirobebulia adamiani-RmerTis, adamiani-yofierebis mimarTebis
araswori gagebiT.
haidegeris mizania ukuagdos yofierebis miRmuroba, sxvagvarad gai-
azros adamiani-yofierebis mimarTeba da aCvenos adamiani-yofierebis Sex-
vedris SesaZlebloba da adamiani-yofierebis mimarTebis axleburi gaazre-
biT daiZlios absoluturi transcendentis miRmuroba, rac SesaZlebels
gaxdis yofierebaze azrovnebas. unda ganvasxvavoT RmerTis (yofierebis)
arsebobis dasabuTeba da RmerTis (yofierebis) yofnis, mocemulobis dasa-
buTebis problema. amisaTvis aucilebelia adamianis yofnis da yofierebis
yofnis gansxvavebuli gageba.
adamianis Rirseba adamianuroba aris SesaZlebeli Tavisufal azrov-
nebad yofnis dros, rac saerTod Tavisuflebis safuZvelia. amitom ibrZvi-
an yovelTvis adamianis Rirsebis winaaRmdeg. mxolod yofierebis azrov-
nebis safuZvelzea SesaZlebeli Tavisufleba da Rirseba, rac gulisxmobs
unars ikisro brali, iyo Tavisufali da aiRo sakuTar Tavze pasuxismgeb-
64
loba, rac adamianis pirovnebad yofnis safuZvelia. yofierebaze azrovneba

mas daanaxebs namdvilsa da WeSmarits, romlis mixedviT warmarTavs sakuTar
yofierebas. iqve haidegeri SeniSnavs, rom adamianis Rirseba ar unda gavi-
goT mcdarad. àdamianis arsis simaRle ar mdgomareobs imaSi, rom adamiani
arsebulTa substancia, maTi subieqti iyos~.1 adamianis Rirseba ar mdgoma-
reobs subieqtad yofnaSi, arsebulTa mbrZaneblad yofnaSi, raTa Semdeg ar-
sebulebi obieqtad gadaaqcios. haidegeris azriT, adamianis Rirseba imaSia,
rom adamiani aris yofierebis mwyemsi da yofierebis mezobeli. igi unda yo-
fierebis WeSmaritebas meTvalyureobdes. amisaken miiswrafoda azrovneba,
romelic mocemulia `yofiereba da dro~-Si werda haidegeri. samyaros
gaTavisuflebam metafizikurisagan ar moutana adamians meti Tavisufleba
anda Rirseba. Rirsebis safuZveli SeiZleba davinaxoT yofierebaze filo-
sofiur azrovnebaSi da ara kritikul azrovnebas SeuZlia adamians daubru-
nos Rirsebis gancda.
haidegers surs adamiani Semoabrunos sakuTar Rirsebaze ganazrebisa-
ken da daafuZnos Rirsebis fenomeni. rogor SeiZleba es ganxorcieldes?
Rirsebis gageba da aRiareba emyareba yofierebis gagebis SesaZleblobis
axsnas. swored yofierebis WeSmaritebis SigniT dgoma da azrovneba aZlevs
adamianis yofnas Cum Zalas, rasac Rirseba hqvia. ìgi aris yofierebis WeS-
maritebis morCileba, mxolod aseT morCilebas aqvs unari aitanos da dai-
valdebulos Tavi. sxvagvarad yovelgvari kanoni darCeboda mxolod adami-
anuri namoqmedari~. igi aris susti da Cumi Zala, romelic gvCuqnis sulis
simtkices da mamacobas.
haidegeris erT-erT problemas warmoadgens yofierebis gagebis da
misi safuZvlis da SesaZleblobis yofierebis mocemulobis axsna. erTi
mxriv, adamians aqvs yofierebis gageba, rogorc faqti; meore mxriv, yofie-
reba aris absoluturi transcendenti. rogor SeiZleba gadaiWras es prob-
lema? arsebobs am problemis gadaWris ramdenime gza. platoni Tvlida, rom
yofierebis gageba adamianis cnobierebis TanSobili codnaa. kantis mixed-
viT, yofiereba, rogorc absoluturi transcendenti (rogorc nivTi Tavis-
Tavad), zemoqmedebs Cvens grZobaze da gonebaze, rac aris adamianisaTvis
damaxasiaTebeli yofierebis gagebis safuZveli, oRond, Tu rogor xdeba, es
CvenTvis gaugebari da miuwvdomelia. hegelis Tanaxmad, absoluturi gone-
ba da adamianuri goneba msgavsi bunebisaa, amitomac adamianur gonebas Se-
uZlia gaigos absoluturi goneba. haidegeri uaryofs yofierebis gagebis
SesaZlebloba axsnas metafizikuri naxtomis meSveobiT.
ontologiurad ras niSnavs, roca adamiani ambobs: `RmerTi aris~,
`CvenTan ars RmerTi~? rogoria adamianis RmerTis (yofierebis) winaSe dgo-
mis ontologiuri struqtura, rogoria TviTon yofierebis (RmerTis) yof-
1
haidegeri m., werili humanizmis Sesaxeb, Tb., 2012, gv. 13.
65
nis ontologiuri struqtura da rogoria maTi Sexvedris ontologiuri

struqtura?
haidegeri gansxvavebul gzas gvTavazobs. igi amodis ara adamianis da
yofierebis transcendenturi daSorebisagan da Semdeg cdilobs daadginos
maTi Tanaarsebobis saxeebi, aramed amodis adamianis mier yofierebis, Rmer-
Tis gagebis faqtidan, rac maTi Sexvedris da yofierebis amqveynad yofnis
wesebis gareSe SeuZlebeli iqneboda. Tu aixsneba, rogor aris SesaZlebeli
yofierebis gagebis qona adamianisaTvis, maSin gasagebi gaxdeba yofierebis
amqveynad yofnis SesaZlebloba da wesebi, rom adamiansa da yofierebas So-
ris unda arsebobdes Sexvedris SesaZlebloba da Sesabamisi saxeebi am Sex-
vedrisa.
misi amocana aris ara RmerTTan, yofierebasTan mimarTebaSi adami-
anis yofnis ufro originaluri eqsplikacia, ara yofierebis konceptua-
lizacia, rac Semecnebis amocanaa, aramed yofierebis ontologizacia, anu
yofierebis samyaro-Si-yofnis amqveynad arsebobis, mocemulobis forme-
bis dadgena, rac SesaZlebels xdis adamianisa da yofierebis Sexvedras, rac
orive sawyisis aqtiurobas emyareba da ar aris mxolod adamianis movaleoba
ganaxorcielos metafizikuri naxtomi. es aris yofierebis ontologia.
haidegeris mier adamianis Rirsebis dafuZneba xdeba yofierebis kon-
ceptualizaciidan yofierebis ontologizaciaze gadasvliT, yofierebis
ontologiis SeqmniT.
haidegeris azriT, evropulma azrovnebam dasawyisSive dakarga yofi-
erebis fenomeni, radgan fiqrobda, rom gaiazrebs uSualod yofierebas. es
iyo is Secdoma, ramac gansazRvra dasavluri azrovnebis bedi da Tavisebu-
reba. ar iqna gaazrebuli yofierebis yofnis, mocemulobis wesebi. haide-
germa yofierebis adamianisaTvis mocemulobis wesi, yofierebis samyaro-
Si-yofnis wesi daaxasiaTa rogorc Sien ist, Sein ereignis, Sein es gibt.
I. yofiereba aris absoluturi transcendenti. yofiereba àris~ Sien
ist, kategoriuli gamoTqmaa da miuTiTebs, rom yofiereba aris absoluturi
transcendenturoba, miRmuri da gaurkvevloba, amitom yofiereba SeiZleba
iyos absoluturi varaudi (spekulacia). `yofiereba aris~ am debulebaSi, am
varaudSi yofiereba yvelaze Sorsaa adamianisagan.
II. Sein ereignet, yofiereba aris absoluturi transcendenti, magram, ro-
gorc absoluturi transcendenti, arsebobs dafarulobidan gamosvlis
wesiT. es aris Eereignis, xdomileba; yofiereba xdomilebaa, rogorc yofie-
rebis dafarulobidan gamosvlis uwyveti da maradiuli procesi. èreignis~
`yofiereba rogorc xdomileba~ miuTiTebs, rom yofiereba aris dafa-
rulobidan gamosvla, maSasadame, `Sein ist, Sein es gibt, Sein ist ereignis~ SeiZle-
ba ganvasxvavoT adamianisagan damoukideblobis xarisxis mixedviT da aseve
isini SeiZleba ganvixiloT rogorc TviTon yofierebis TviTmocemulobis
gansxvavebuli modusebi: yofiereba aris, yofierebas adgili aqvs, yofie-
66
reba xdomilebaa. xdomileba aris is, rac aZlevs safuZvels adgilis qonas
da arsebobas. xdomileba TviTon arc aris da arc adgili aqvs, aramed TviT
gvecxadeba, rogorc yofierebis dafarulobidan gamosvla da SesaZlebels
xdis `yofiereba da dros~. es `da~ SesaZlebels xdis masTan adamianis mimar-
Tebas. xdomilebidan gamoiyvaneba rogorc àris~, ise àdgili aqvs~ da ara
piriqiT. aq momcemi da mocemuli erTia. es ès~ gvaZlevs TavisTavs, rogorc
mocemuli da momcemi erTdroulad.
III. yofierebis, rogorc xdomilebis, safuZvelze, yofierebis dafaru-
lobidan gamosvlis Semdeg da Sedegad yofierebas adgili aqvs fenomenis sa-
xiT. es niSnavs, rom yofiereba Tavis Tavs aCvenebs Tavisi Tavis winaSe Tavis
TavSi. igi, rogorc aseTi, aris ganaTebuli, sinaTle da Ria SexvedrisaTvis.
yofiereba fenomenis saxiT mocemulia TviTkmari. igi ar anaTebs ganzrax
aravisaTvis, aramed mxolod sakuTari TavisaTvis. Sein es gibt niSnavs mogve-
cema, adgili aqvs, gveboZeba, romlis arseboba ar aris Cemze damokidebuli.
yofierebas adgili aqvs, yofiereba mocemulia niSnavs yofiereba samya-
ro-Si-myofobs, rogorc fenomeni. igi aris Tavisi Tavis TavisTavis wi-
naSe-myofoba. am doneze yofierebis absoluturi miRmuroba daZleulia da
yofiereba misawvdomia adamianisaTvis. yofiereba, rogorc fenomeni, Riad
SesaZlebels xdis adamianisaTvis masTan pirvelad Sexvedras. oRond, adami-
ani valdebulia ganaxorcielos metafizikuri naxtomi, miiCnevda klasiku-
ri filosofia. haidegeri am valdebulebaSi xedavs evropuli azrovnebis
subieqtivizms. adamians ki ar aqvs movaleoba ganaxorcielos metafizikuri
naxtomi, aramed adamiani, rogorc egzistenci, aris ganxorcielebuli tran-
scendireba, Tavisi Tavis gareT yofna. es gareT yofna ki gansazRvrulia ro-
gorc yofierebis Riaobis SigniT dogma. yofierebis (fenomeni) da adamianis
(eg-zistenci) Sexvedra SesaZlebelia xdomilebis, rogorc yofierebis, da-
farulobidan gamosvlis safuZvelze. mis safuZvelze adamiani aris yofi-
erebis gagebis mqone da amiT ganisazRvreba adamianis yofnis sazrisic. es
aris yofierebisa da adamianis pirveladi Sexvedra. es SesaZlebelia ara mar-
to adamianis aqtivobiT, aramed yofierebis TviTmovleniT, samyaro-Si-yof-
niT. amis magaliTia qristes fenomeni (6,61) RmerTi. yofiereba aris absolu-
turi transcendenti, magram igi ar aris miRmuri, rogorc a. kamiu miiCnevs
da romelic ar pasuxobs adamians. igi Semodis adamianTan kontaqtSi, gveZ-
leva rogorc saCuqari, misawvdomia adamianisaTvis, radgan masTan Sexvedra
SesaZlebelia. es Sexvedra SesaZlebelia ormxrivi aqtivobis safuZvelze.
evropulma azrovnebam da kulturam daiviwya qristes paradigma, rogorc
absoluturis keTili nebis, aqtivobis gamoxatuleba, ramac SesaZlebeli
gaxada Sexvedra. yofiereba Tavs gviboZebs sxvadasxva saxiT da Tu rogori
saxiT gviboZebs Tavs, momavalSi amis gamoTvla SeuZlebelia. misi TviTboZe-
bis wesrigi arc SemTxveviTia, arc aucilebeli, aramed xvedriseulia.
67
yofierebis yofnis, mocemulobis am saxeebiT naCvenebia procesi, ro-

melic SeiZleba aRiweros rogorc yofierebis dafarulobidan gamosvlis
safexurebi. adgili aqvs or paralelur process yofierebis yofnas moce-
mulobis saxiT da adamianis yofnas Tavis Tavs gareT. romelic SesaZlebels
xdis Sexvedras, rac aris safuZveli adamianSi yofierebis gagebis aRmoce-
nebis, gazrdisa da ganviTarebisa. pirveladi Sexvedris orive elementis aq-
tiuroba SesaZlebels xdis am Sexvedras.
namdvili metafizikis mizania axsnas yofierebis, rogorc absolutu-
ri transcendentis, samyaro-Si-yofnis SesaZlebloba, rogorc metafiziku-
ri gaTiSulobis daZlevis saSualeba, adamianis da yofierebis Sexvedrisa da
gagebis safuZveli. adamians mimarTeba aqvs yofierebis samyaro-Si-yofnis am
saxeebTan da ara yofierebasTan uSualod. adamians ar SeuZlia parmenide-
seuli debulebis àris sakuTriv yofiereba~ gamoTqma, sakuTriv yofiere-
ba CvenTvis miuwvdomelia, yofiereba ar aris, aramed gveboZeba da CvenTvis
misawvdomia is, Tu rogor gveboZeba; rogor aqvs adgili yofierebas, amis
araRiareba da verdanaxva aris dasavluri azrovnebis subieqtivizmi, ramac
ganapiroba nicSes mier gamoTqmuli `RmerTis sikvdilis~ fenomeni, radgan
ver gaiTvaliswina yofierebis samyaro-Si-yofnis wesebis mravalferovne-
ba. igi darCa `yofiereba aris~ debulebis safexurze, amitom RmerTis tran-
scendenturoba gaxda adamianis sulSi misi sikvdilis safuZveli.
adamianis ontologiuri daniSnulebaa gan-Tqvas yofierebis RiaobaSi
dgomis idumaleba, rac imaSi mdgomareobs, rom adamiani aRmoaCens: àrsi
aris da ararsi ar aris~. mas ena mieca swored am idumalebis gan-TqmisaTvis.
es gan-Tqma aris gaziareba, dialogi. am idumalebis gageba afuZnebs meta-
fizikur epoqas, rodesac adamiani gaurbis, iviwyebs Tavis bunebas es aris
adamianis yofierebis krizisi, misi gaucxoebis metafizikuri safuZveli. am
pirveladi Sexvedris xasiaTiT ganisazRvreba adamianis msoflmxedvelo-
bis ZiriTadi niSnebi, misi optimistoba Tu pesimistoba. Rirseba adamians
mocemuli aqvs dabadebiT da misi warTmeva SeuZlebelia. adamiani SeiZleba
mokla, waarTva sicocxle, magram Rirsebas ver waarTmev. unda ganvasxvavoT
adamianuri yofierebis sami done: adamiani, rogorc bio-socialuri arseba,
adamiani, rogorc cocxali goneba da adamiani, rogorc Rirseba, rac yofie-
rebaze azrovnebaSi mdgomareobs.
filosofiis mizania adamians mudam Seaxsenos, warmarTos, mzad gaxa-
dos am pirvelad SexvedrisaTvis da sakuTari misiisaTvis. aqedan gamomdina-
reobs adamianis pasuxismgebloba yovelive arsebulis mimarT. amasve emya-
reba misi pretenzia arsebulTa centrad yofnisa da arsebulTa samyaroze
batonobisa. pirveladi Sexvedris naTeli gageba SeiZleba iyos misi ekolo-
giuri cnobierebis safuZveli. es aris misi Rirsebis ontologiuri safuZ-
veli.
68
haidegeri ganasxvavebs adamianuri yofnis sam dones: adamiani, ro-

gorc biologiuri arseba, socialuri arseba da rogorc goniTi arseba Rir-
seuli yofierebis saxiT. Rirsebaze uaris Tqma adamianis masad gadaqcevis
aucilebeli pirobaa. metafizikuris, RmerTis ukugdeba aris adamianis ma-
sad gadaqcevis safuZveli rogorc istoriulad, ise metafizikurad.
literatura:
1. ramiSvili v. qristes paradigma m. haidegeris ontologiaSi. Jur. religia,
2003
2. ramiSvili v. yofierebis konceptualizaciidan yofierebis ontolo-
gizaciisaken m. haidegeris ontologiaSi. Jur. filosofiur-Teologiuri
mimomxilveli, Tb. 2011
3. ramiSvili v. adamiani aRar azrovnebs, Tb. 2012
4. ramiSvili v. adamianis adamianoba mis RirsebaSi mdgomareobs, Tb. 2012
5. haidegeri m. nicSes sityva RmerTi mkvdaria, werili humanizmis Sesaxeb,
Tb. 2012
6. Heidegger M. Brief uber den Humanismus, in Wegmarken, vittorio klostermann, Frankfurt
am Main, 1967
7. Heidegger M.Sein und Zeit,Max Niemeyer Verlag, Halle, 1993, p.5-6
VALERIAN RAMISHVILI
Being of Human in the Epoch of Risk and the Problem of Human Dignity
Summary
Human dignity, as a form of being and understanding in the world, has lost its ontological
ground, which is a direct consequence of forgetting Being. Human dignity is possible on the
ground of free thinking about Being and it represents free thinking on Being. A person denies the
thinking of Being as Being has become the Transcendence, the Beyond (God is dead). Heidegger
considers that Being is not Transcendence, the Beyond and thinking about Being is possible and
essential. The transcendence of Being is rejected by means of explaning the possibility of initial
meeting of Being and Human.
For this purpose, Heidegger makes the following steps:
69
A new understanding of ontological difference means not only the distinction between
Being and real things, but also the distinction between Being and a form of selfgiveness of Being
in the world.
Heidegger defined the forms of selfgiveness of Being in the world as a hierarchical order:
Sein ist, Sein ereignis, Sein es gibt, which is defined by the degree of openness of Being for the
person.
Modern thinking has forgotten the paradigm of Christ as an example of initial
meeting.
The transition from conceptualization of Being to ontologization of Being creates ontology
of Being.
70
vaJa niblaZe
filosofia rogorc `meta~
TiTqmis yvela didi filosofosi Taviseburad ganmartavda, Tu ra

aris filosofia, ras Seiswavlis, ra daniSnuleba da gamarTleba aqvs mis ar-
sebobas, raSi mdgomareobs misi specifika mecnieruli codnisagan, Tu, zo-
gadad, cnobierebis sxva formebisagan gansxvavebiT da ase Semdeg. magram,
erTi umTavresi problema mudmivad idga filosofiuri azrovnebis wina-
Se. es aris `samyaro-adamianis~ (anda àdamiani-samyaros~), rogorc erTiani
mTelis, Sesaxeb warmodgenebi. am mTlianobas (mis komponentebs cal-calke
Tu erTmaneTTan mimarTebaSi) filosofia ixilavs mecnierebisagan gansxva-
vebulad da am gansxvavebas mecnierebisagan metafizikuri azrovneba (meta-
fizikuri sferos gaazrebis `wina planze~ wamoweva) ewodeba saxelad; aseve
miTosuri da religiuri cnobierebisagan gansxvavebulad da am gansxvavebas
codnis sferos (gonebis, logikis) `primatis~ aRiareba ewodeba saxelad.
filosofia ianusiviT urTierTsapirispiro mxares iyureba erTdrou-
lad. filosofiuri azrovnebis ìanusiseburi~ (kargi gagebiT) mdgomareoba
gamoixateba adamianisken da mis gareT arsebulisken, warsulisken da momav-
lisken, dasawyisisken da dasasrulisken, religiurisken da mecnierulisken
(~fizikurisken~ da `metafizikurisken~, àmqveyniurisken~ da ìmqveyniuris-
ken~) erTdroulad cqeraSi. religiurisa da mecnierulis `gadakveTis~ wer-
tils filosofia SeiZleba ewodos saxelad. bertran raseli SemTxveviT ar
miiCnevda filosofias im `saarviso miwad~, romelsac erTmaneTSi ver iyo-
fen Teologia da mecniereba (1).
metafizikuris primatis aRiareba filosofias religiasTan akavSi-
rebs, xolo logikurobasa da dasabuTebulobaze pretenzia mecnierul
SemecnebasTan (da codnasTan).filosofia garkveulwilad aris religiuri
problematikis mecnieruli meTodebiTa da xerxebiT gadaWris mcdeloba.
`filosofosTa umravlesoba acxadebs, rom maT SeuZliaT aprioruli meta-
fizikuri sjiT daamtkicon iseTi ram, rogoricaa religiis fundamenturi
dogmebi~ (2), rac dRemde grZeldeba, miuxedavad misi warumateblobisa. Cve-
ni azriT, es aris filosofiuri cnobierebis mTavari specifika da ara is,
rom mecnieruli Semecnebis axali kuTxe aRmoaCinos, gaxdes erT-erTi (Tun-
dac, gansakuTrebuli) mecniereba, iyos mecnierebaTa zogadi meTodologia,
daadginos mecnieruli Semecnebis SesaZleblobebi da sazRvrebi, ganasxvaos
erTmaneTisagan mecnieruli da filosofiuri Semecneba, rogorc pirveli
da meore rigis (safexuris) mimarTeba gare samyarosa Tu sakuTar TavTan (3)
71
da ase Semdeg. filosofiis mimarT aseTi Sexedulebebi arc axalia da arc

ucxo.
rogorc wesi, mecnieruloba sapatios, Rirseuls, saWiros da sasar-
geblos da, amdenad, gamarTlebuls niSnavs. amitom filosofiuri azrovne-
bis pretenzia mecnierulobaze ar aris gasakviri. `mecnieruli komunizmi~,
`mecnieruli aTeizmi~, lamis `mecnieruli religia~ Semovides modaSi da
ra gasakviria, rom `mecnierul filosofiaze~ qadagebdes vinme istoriul
warsulSi, dRevandelobaSi anda samomavlod (Tumca, zogierTi moazrovne
filosofiis mecnierulobas kategoriulad gamoricxavs. magaliTad, ha-
idegeris mixedviT, filosofiuri azrovneba iwyeba iq, sadac mecnierebis
Tvalsawieri mTavrdeba. mecniereba ikvlevs Tvalxilul samyaros, grZno-
bad-aRqmad sinamdviles. filosofias ki am Tvalxiluli samyaros uxilavi
safuZveli ainteresebs, anu metafizikaa da ara fizika. es aris filosofiis
Rirseba da specifika da ara misi pretenzia mecnierulobaze, fiqrobs hai-
degeri da mecnieruli filosofia miaCnia `xis rkinad~).
mecniereba bunebrivad ukavSirdeba adamianis praqtikul miznebs
sargeblianobas yofiT sferoSi. nebismieri mecnierebis mniSvneloba da Ri-
rebuleba, pirvel rigSi, am TvalsazrisiT izomeba. am kuTxiT filosofia
`CamorCeba~ mecnierebas (aseve xelovnebas da religias), ramdenadac misi
`sargeblianoba~ iseTive uSualo da aRqmadi ar aris, rogoric mecnierebis
(anda religiisa da xelovnebis) monapovrebs axasiaTebT. am mxriv niSandob-
livia filosofiuri codnis aristoteleseuli Sefaseba: . . .~yvela mecnie-
reba ufro aucilebelia, vidre igi, magram masze ukeTesi arcerTi ar aris~. .
. (4). aristoteles filosofiis ùkeTesoba~ sxva mecnierebebTan SedarebiT
esmis rogorc im realobis ùkeTesoba~, romlis Sesaxebac filosofia gvesa-
ubreba, im realobasTan SedarebiT, romelsac danarCeni mecnierebani Seis-
wavlian. es aris metafizikuris upiratesobis aRiareba fizikis sferosTan
SedarebiT, rac, aristotelemdec kargad iyo cnobili da damkvidrebuli
ukve armenidesTan da, gansakuTrebiT, platonTan, romlis ìdeaTa Teoria~
dResac rCeba mTeli evropuli metafizikis klasikur saxed. SemTxveviT ar
miiCneven mTel evropul filosofias platonis `gamoqvabulis miTSi~ aR-
werili samyaros suraTis, rogorc samyaros metafizikuri struqturis,
gaazrebisa da gadalaxvis mcdelobad (5). alfred norT uaithedis TqmiT,
`mTeli evropuli filosofia SeiZleba warmovidginoT rogorc platonis
komentarebi~ (6).
is, rasac Semdgom metafizika ewoda saxelad, aristotelesTan `pirvel
filosofiad~ iwodeboda. rac ganpirobebuli iyo sakvlevi sagnis gansxvave-
biT `danarCen filosofiebTan~ SedarebiT. aristotelesTvis pirveli fi-
losofiis sagania àrsebuli rogorc arsebuli~, anu RmerTi, rogorc az-
rovnebis azrovneba, uZravi mamoZravebeli. is mxolod gonebiT miiwvdomeba.
72
vaJa niblaZe _ filosofia rogorc `meta~
xolo `danarCen filosofiebs~ sworedac rom Tvalxiluli, grZnobadi sam-

yaro aqvT kvlevis sagnad (aristotelesTan pirveli filosofia igive iyo,
rasac Semdgom, garda metafizikisa, ontologiac daerqva saxelad, Tumca,
aqve SevniSnavT, rom zogadad ontologia ar daiyvaneba metafizikaze. yvela
metafizika ontologiuric aris, magram ara piruku).
cxadia, filosofiuri gaazrebis sagani, garda transcendenturisa
(metafizikurisa), sxvac bevri ram SeiZleba gaxdes mecnierebis, religiis,
xelovnebis, politikis, zogadad kulturis, adamianis, bunebis da sxva kon-
kretuli realobebis saxiT (maT ricxvSi igulisxmeba Tavad filosofiuri
azrovnebac. amis Sesaxeb cota qvemoT). filosofiis specifikac aq unda ve-
ZeboT. kerZod, garda imisa, rom metafizikuroba misi umTavresi Sinagani
da istoriuli maxasiaTebelia da metafizikuris (transcendenturis) Sesa-
xeb Cveni cnobierebis `nafiqrals~ gadmoscems, yvelafers, rasac is Tavis
sagnad gaixdis arametafizikur sferoSi, transcendenturTan mimarTebaSi
`zomavs~, anu metafizikuri poziciebidan afasebs. pirvel rigSi ki adamians,
rogorc aseTs.
adamianisTvis sakuTari Tavis (da ara mxolod sakuTari Tavis) meta-
fizikuri gaazreba da Sefaseba erT-erTi aucilebeli `sulieri sazrdoa~.
filosofiis, rogorc adamianisTvis sulieri sazrdos mompoveblisa da
mimwodeblis, rangSi warmoCena axali ar aris. amis uamravi magaliTi SeiZle-
ba daiZebnos. Cven aq sanimuSod isev bertran rasels mivmarTavT, rogorc
tipur arametafizikoss, magram filosofiis metafizikuri bunebis da, zo-
gadad, adamianis cxovrebaSi filosofiis rolis dadebiTad Semfasebels:
`...ra mniSvneloba aqvs filosofias da ratom unda SeviswavloT is. am sakiTx-
is garkveva imis gamo ufroa aucilebeli, rom mravali adamiani mecnierebis
an praqtikuli saqmianobis gavleniT eWvobs, rom filosofia sxva araferia
Tu ara drois uwyinari, Tumc ki fuWi flangva~...
`praqtikuli~ adamiani, am sityvis Cveulebrivi mniSvnelobiT, isaa,
vinc mxolod materialur moTxovnilebebs cnobs, vinc icis, rom sxeuls
sakvebi sWirdeba, magram aviwydeba, rom sakvebi gonebisTvisac aucilebe-
lia... sulieri simdidre TiTqmis iseTive mniSvnelovania, rogorc materia-
luri. filosofiis mniSvneloba swored am sulier simdidreSi unda aRmova-
CinoT... adamiani, romelic ver grZnobs filosofiis niuansebs, mTel cxov-
rebas atarebs crurwmenebis tyveobaSi... filosofia, marTalia, amcirebs
Cvens darwmunebulobas imaSi, Tu rani arian sagnebi, magram sagrZnoblad
zrdis imis codnas, Tu ra SeiZleba iyvnen isini; ganmaTavisuflebeli eWvis
samefoSi SeRweviT da nacnobi sagnebis ucnobi aspeqtebis CvenebiT, CvenSi
gaocebis unars aRvivebs... moulodnel SesaZleblobaTa Cvenebisas, utili-
tarobis garda, filosofias kidev erTi, albaT umTavresi, mniSvnelobac
aqvs, romelic aris misi Wvretis obieqtebis masStaburobisa da am Wvretisas
73
viwro da piraduli miznebisagan gaTavisuflebis Sedegi. instinqturi ada-

mianis cxovreba misi piradi interesebis wreSia Caketili: masSi, SesaZloa,
ojaxi da megobrebic Sedian, magram gare samyaro saTvalavSi ar miiReba...
aseT cxovrebaSi aris raRac daZabuli da SemboWveli da masTan SedarebiT
filosofiuri cxovreba mSvidi da Tavisufalia... Tu ver SevZeliT ise ga-
vafarTooT Cveni interesebi, rom mTeli gare samyaro maTSi CavrToT, maSin
alyaSemortymul cixesimagreSi gamomwyvdeul garnizons davemsgavsebiT...
aseT cxovrebaSi mSvidobis nacvlad gamudmebuli brZolaa survilis daJi-
nebasa da nebis uZlurebas Soris... Tuki gvinda Cveni cxovreba amaRlebuli
da Tavisufali gavxadoT, am cixesa da am brZolas Tavi unda davaRwioT. Ta-
vis daRwevis erT-erTi gza `filosofiuri Wvretaa~ (7).
am vrcel citataSi kargad Cans raselis damokidebuleba filosofi-
is arsebis, misi raobisa da daniSnulebis, zogadad, filosofiis saWiroebis
Sesaxeb. es erT-erTi sanimuSo Tvalsazrisia im Tvalsazrisebs Soris, rom-
lebic miznad isaxaven gamarTleba mounaxon cnobierebis mier samyarosa da
adamianis filosofiuri kuTxiT gaazrebis aucileblobas da mis did mniS-
vnelobas (8).
rogorc wesi, filosofiis raobis, misi saWiroebisa da daniSnulebis
Sesaxeb msjeloba, Tavadac filosofiur naazrevs (Tavisebur filosofias,
filosofosobas) warmoadgens. maSin rodesac, vTqvaT, religiis Teoria, Ta-
vad religia ver iqneba, xelovnebis Teoria, uSualod xelovneba ar aris da
ase Semdeg.pfilosofia am mxriv gamoirCeva cnobierebis yvela sxva forme-
bisagan. TviTrefleqsuroba misi Sinagani bunebaa. nebismieri filosofiuri
problemis kvlevas win uZRvis (an igulisxmeba) Tavad filosofiis raobis da
misi saWiroebis Sesaxeb kiTxvaze garkveuli pasuxi (9), Tanac ise, rom es pa-
suxi isev da isev filosofiuri azrovnebis farglebSi rCeba da mis specifi-
kas inarCunebs, rac filosofiis mier yvelafris (sakuTari Tavis CaTvliT)
`meta~-s TvaliT danaxvas niSnavs. `meta~-Si igulisxmeba raimes iqeT (gareT)
gasvla da misi garedan danaxva. metafizika Tavad fizika aRar aris. metama-
Tematika maTematikis farglebs scildeba da ase Semdeg, magram metafilo-
sofia isev filosofiur azrovnebas miekuTvneba da zogadad filosofiis
`nawils~ Seadgens an rogorc erT-erTi filosofiuri disciplina, an ro-
gorc ama Tu im filosofiuri sistemis Sesavali (10) (amis klasikuri nimuSia
kantis `kriticizmi~), an rogorc garkveuli poziciebidan agebuli `filo-
sofiis istoriuli~ xedva.
Tavad termini `metafilosofia~ sul ramdenime aTwleuls iTvlis
dasavlur filosofiaSi (11). am terminis Semotanas da gamoyenebas CvenSic
hqonda gamoxmaureba. specialuri wignic daiwera saTauriT `metafiloso-
fiis struqtura~ (12). ramdenad saWiro, mizanSewonili da gamarTlebulia
termin metafilosofiis gamoyeneba da misi Sesatyvisi axali filosofi-
74
uri disciplinis dafuZneba, es calke Temaa. mas SeiZleba hyavdes da hyavs

kidec rogorc momxreebi, ise mowinaaRmdegeebi. mowinaaRmdegeTa mTavari
argumenti mdgomareobs SemdegSi: filosofia Tavisi bunebiT ukve `metas~
niSnavs, TviTon aris meta da metas meta isev meta iqneba. amdenad metafilo-
sofia, principSi, filosofiis tavtologia gamodis da axals verafers mog-
vcems (13).
erTi ram faqtia: filosofiaSi aSkarad ganirCeva erTmaneTisagn az-
rovnebis ori rigi (rasc ver vityviT cnobierebis sxva formebze). kerZod,
erTia, rodesac filosofiuri azrovneba Tavis Tavze axdens refleqsias
da cdilobs upasuxos sakiTxTa iseT rigs, rogoricaa ra aris filosofia;
ras Seiswavlis is; rogoria misi meTodebi; ra adgili ukavia mas cnobiere-
bis struqturaSi; ras aZlevs igi adamians; zogadad ra gamoyeneba SeiZleba
hqondes mas da, aqedan gamomdinare, ramdenad gamarTlebulad da ufleba-
mosilad unda CaiTvalos misi arseboba?! anda, SesaZlebelia Tu ara filo-
sofiuri sistemis ageba da ase Semdeg. xolo, sxva sakiTxia, rodesac filo-
sofiuri azrovneba cdilobs axsnas, magaliTad, Tu ra aris samyaros sawyisi
da rogor warmoiqmneba misgan samyaro; ra aris samyaro da ra adgili ukavia
masSi adamians; ra aris yofierebis sazrisi saerTod da kerZod adamianuri
arsebobisa; rogor gaCnda cnobiereba; rogor xdeba Semecneba da sxva. anu,
rodesac filosofiuri azrovneba cdilobs aagos erTiani dasrulebuli
msoflmxedvelobrivi suraTi samyarosi, anu mogvces saboloo pasuxebi
usasrulobis Sesaxeb Cveni sasrulo arsebobis manZilze (rac adamianuri
gonebisaTvis yvelaze `mZime~ amocana da yvelaze `pretenziuli~ mizania da
romelsac Tavidan ver iSorebs adamianuri goneba, `radgan is TviT gonebis
bunebas mouxvevia misTvis Tavs~, rogorc kants miaCnda (14)).
faqtia isic, rom es ori rigi filosofiuri azrovnebisa sulac ar aris
erTmaneTisagan yru kedliT gamijnuli. piriqiT, isini imdenad mWidro ur-
TierTkavSirSi da urTierTganpirobebulobaSi arian erTmaneTTan, rom cal
-calke maTi kvleva, urTierTmoSveliebisa da ilustrirebis gareSe, arc ki
xerxdeba da azrs kargavs. amitomac isini xSirad erTsa da imave moazrovnes
erTsa da imave naSromSi aqvs xolme mocemuli, rogorc erTiani mTliani na-
azrevis ori urTierTSemavsebeli mxare. zogjer ki SeiZleba calke naSroma-
dac iyos warmodgenili. magaliTad, kantis samive `kritika~, rogorc kantis
mTliani filosofiuri sistemis `gnoseologiuri~ Sesavali, romelzedac
mTeli Senoba dgas. aseve, vTqvaT, dekartis `ganazrebani meTodis Sesaxeb~,
anda huserlis `logikuri gamokvlevebi~ da sxva.
amrigad, Tu vupasuxebT kiTxvaze gadis Tu ara `metafilosofia~ fi-
losofiis farglebs gareT pasuxi Semdegnairi SeiZleba iyos: metafilo-
sofiuri azrovneba Tavisi bunebiT kvlav filosofiur azrovnebas warmo-
adgens da misi gasvla filosofiuri cnobierebis farglebs gareT, Zalian
75
pirobiTia (SeiZleba iTqvas, rom moCvenebiTia). aq ara gvaqvs iseTi saxis gan-
sxvaveba, rogoric fizikasa da metafizikas Soris, maTematikasa da metama-
Tematikas Soris da ase Semdeg. magram, pirobiTad, termin `metafilosofiis~
xmareba zemoaRniSnuli garkveuli dazustebebiT da mosazrebebiT, zogjer
SeiZleba gamoyenebul iqnes filosofiuri azrovnebis `pirveli rigis~ (sa-
fexuris) aRsaniSnavad. Tumca, Cven amis veranair gardauval aucileblobas
ver vxedavT da migvaCnia, rom am terminis gareSec SeiZleba im gansxvavebis
gadmocema filosofiuri azrovnebis zemoxsenebul or `rigs~ (safexurs)
Soris, rasac filosofiis istoria TvalnaTliv gviCvenebs.
`metafilosofiuri ganazrebebi~, Tuki vrclad iqneba masSi warmodge-
nili da ganxiluli filosofiis istoriuli masala (sxvagvarad arc SeiZle-
ba iyos), garkveuli kuTxiT agebul filosofiis istorias ufro daemsgavse-
ba, vidre raime axal filosofiur disciplinas, an, miT umetes, kerZomecnie-
rul kvlevas, romelsac win `daudevs~ Cveni cnobierebis filosofiuri Tav-
gadasavali (rogorc savsebiT realuri da àmqveyniuri~- arametafizikuri
procesi) da mSvidad aanalizebs mas. swored es pretenzia aqvT `metafilo-
sofiis~ momxreebs: ganixilon metafilosofia, rogorc filosofiisTvis
damaxasiaTebeli mudmivi urTierTdapirispirebuli Tvalsazrisebisagan
Tavisufali axali mecniereba. mis Sesaxeb (igulisxmeba `metafilosofia~)
sakiTxi mecnierulobaze (~metafilosofosebis~ azriT) sadavo aRar aris,
rogorc amas adgili hqonda da dResac aqvs filosofiis mimarT (15).
Cven vTliT, rom `metafilosofia~ filosofiis istoriis specifiku-
ri SemTxvevaa rodesac sagangebod xdeba erTi an ramdenime konkretuli
filosofiuri problemis ganxilva misi ganviTarebis istoriis manZilze. am
SemTxvevaSi `metafilosofosebTan~, rogorc wesi, igulisxmeba sakiTxi, er-
Ti mxriv, filosofiis sagnis, xolo, meore mxriv, Tavad Semecnebis bunebis
Sesaxeb. isini miuTiTeben da savsebiT samarTlianadac, rom erTia, rodesac
adamiani cdilobs Seimecnos mis irgvliv myofi sagnebi da movlenebi da me-
orea, rodesac sakiTxi dgeba Tavad Semecnebis SesaZleblobis, anu `Semec-
nebis Semecnebis~ Sesaxeb da amas asaxeleben umTavresad `metafilosofiis~
gansjis sagnad (16). Tumca, naklebad damajerebeli Cans maTi argumentebi
imis Taobaze, rom es scildeba sakuTriv filosofiur azrovnebas da ker-
Zomecnierul kvlevasTan gvaqvs saqme (17). es filosofiis gansakuTrebuli
Tvisebis TviTrefleqsurobis ugulebelyofaa, rac nawilobriv ganpiro-
bebulia `filosofiisa~ da `filosofiis istoriis~ specifikuri urTier-
TmimarTebis gauTvaliswineblobiTac.
ras warmoadgens da riT gamoirCeva filosofiis istoria sxva istori-
ebisagan gansxvavebiT? saxelmZRvanelo ganmartebiT, filosofiis istori-
is arseboba ganpirobebulia SemdegiT: `... ramdenadac msoflmxedvelobiTi
sakiTxebis acileba adamians ar SeuZlia, xolo skeptikuri pasuxebi maTze,
76
winaaRmdegobrivia, darCenilia erTi gza dauRalavi svla sul ufro da

ufro safuZvliani pasuxisaken... skepticizmze arasdros SeCerebula kacob-
riobis azrovneba... skeptikuri argumentebi warmoadgenen Semmecnebeli go-
nebis mier sakuTari Tavis kritikas (TviTkritikas), romelic saboloo jamSi
ajansaRebs mas. mecnieruli msoflmxedvelobis Ziebis procesSi aucilebe-
lia, rom aTasi sistemis kraxis Semdeg adamianma kvlav axlis, ufro srulyo-
filis agebas mihyos xeli. am gzas adgas adamianuri azrovneba da swored am
safuZvelze arsebobs filosofiis istoria, rogorc faqtiuri procesi da
filosofiis istoria, rogorc mecniereba, romelic am procesis ganviTare-
bis Sinagan kanonzomierebas swavlobs~ (18).
rogoria es procesi, rasac filosofiuri azrovneba hqvia, da rogoria
Tavad am procesis Seswavla, rasac filosofiis istoria ewodeba. pirveli
SeiZleba ganvixiloT, rogorc samyaroze mimarTuli Wvreta (anu `Teoria~,
Tavisi Tavdapirveli, ZvelberZnuli gagebiT), xolo meore, rogorc saku-
Tari namoqmedaris ganWvreta cnobierebis mier. pirveli yvelafris `gare-
dan~ danaxvaa (Wvretaa), meore sakuTari Tavis garedan danaxvis `mcdelo-
ba~. mcdeloba imitom, rom faqtobriv, `Signidan~ xedvasTan gvaqvs saqme. fi-
losofiuri cnobierebis mier sakuTari Tavis danaxvis unari ise, rom kvlav
filosofiur cnobierebad darCes da Tanac sakuTar Tavs daakvirdes `gare-
dan~, ganasxvavebs mas cnobierebis sxva formebisagan. amasTan, TviTdakvir-
veba, rac ar unda gauucxovdes cnobiereba Tavis Tavs da garedan danaxuli
warmoidginos Tavi, manc Taviseburi, obieqturi sinamdvilis danaxvisagan
gansxvavebuli Wvretaa. mTlad ver Tavisufldeba Sinagani bunebisagan da
sakuTari Tavis `Signidan~ danaxvad rCeba. amitomac, filosofiis istoria
da Tavad filosofia ufro àxlos~ dganan erTmaneTTan, vidre, vTqvaT, re-
ligia da religiis istoria, anda maTematika da maTematikis istoria da ase
Semdeg.
filosofiis istoria ufro `filosofiuria~, vidre religiis isto-
ria religiuri, maTematikis istoria maTematikuri da ase Semdeg. es xde-
ba imitom, rom filosofias `meta~ faqtobrivad ara aqvs. TviTon aris Tavi-
si Tavis meta. raimes istoria misi garedan danaxvaa. filosofiis istoria ki
filosofiis mier sakuTari Tavis danaxvaa da amitom `SigniT~ (da Signidan)
cqeras warmoadgens da ara `gareT~ (an garedan) cqeras. amitomac vfiqrobT,
rom `metafilosofia~ filosofiis istoriis kerZo SemTxveva ufroa, vidre
raRac axali filosofiuri disciplina (Tanac kerZomecnieruli bunebis).
is ver iqneba filosofiuri azrovnebis sazRvrebis `garRveva~ da ùcxo~
TvaliT gansja filosofiisa.
filosofiuri Semecneba, rogorc saerTod yoveli Semecneba, Tavis sa-
boloo mizans absolutur WeSmaritebas, ver aRwevs. zogi moazrovne miiC-
nevs, rom miznis miuRwevloba filosofiis, rogorc mecnierebis, SeuZleb-
77
lobaze miuTiTebs, radgan, gansxvavebiT sxva mecnierebaTagan, aq ar gvaqvs

ganuxreli aRmavloba memkvidreobis safuZvelze... es ase iqneboda, filo-
sofiis ganviTarebaSi mizani savsebiT mowyvetili rom iyos process. am gan-
viTarebaSi araferi rom ar iyos myari da imgvarad dadgenili, romelic yo-
veli Semdgomi TaobisTvis aucilebelia da, amdenad, absoluturi WeSmari-
tebis `marcvals~ warmoadgens. TiToeuli filosofosi Tavidan rom iwyeb-
des yvelafers, maSin filosofiis istoria ki ar gveqneboda, aramed mxolod
droSi erTimeoris momdevno naazrevTa aRwera (19). magram faqtia, rom es
ase ar aris.
rogorc wesi, Tavdapirvelad filosofiis istoria (Tu misi magvari
ram) iwereboda xolme, rogorc sakuTari filosofiuri moZRvrebis wanam-
ZRvari (Sesavali). manamde arsebuli filosofiuri Tvalsazrisebis mimo-
xilva. yvela aseTi filosofiis istoriuli `kursis~ dasasruli axali fi-
losofiuri koncefciis Seqmnas isaxavda miznad. egreT wodebuli `metafi-
losofiac~ aseTi Ziebaa winandeli filosofiuri naazrevisa, oRond Tavad
filosofiis raobisa da misi daniSnulebis, filosofiuri Semecnebis speci-
fikisa da misi kerZomecnieruli Semecnebisagan gansxvavebis kuTxiT.
ramdenadac nebismieri filosofiuri moZRvrebis `qvakuTxedad~ yo-
fierebis problemis erTgvari gadawyveta gamodioda, yofierebis proble-
mis kvleva iqca im mTavar `RerZad~, romelzedac didwilad ikinZeboda fi-
losofiuri azrovnebis mTeli Tavgadasavali Tavisi warmatebebiT Tu imed-
gacruebebiT. es warmatebebi da imedgacruebebi ki metwilad damokidebuli
iyo imaze, Tu ramdenad damajerebeli da misaRebi aRmoCndeboda arsebobis
metafizikuri aspeqtebis esa Tu is gaazreba. arsebobis, rogorc aseTis, me-
tafizikuri kuTxiT ganxilva ki, pirvel rigSi, misi substanciis rangSi ay-
vanas niSnavs. substancia filosofiuri cnobierebisaTvis igivea, rac reli-
giuri cnobierebisaTvis RmerTi. rogorc religiaa damokidebuli imaze, Tu
rogoria misi RmerTi, ra Tvisebebi miewereba mas, ise filosofiis mimzidve-
loba da gamZleoba didad aris damokidebuli imaze, Tu rogor wydeba masSi
substanciis sakiTxi; pirvel rigSi ki substanciis mimarTebis sakiTxi yofi-
erebasTan, rogorc aseTTan, radganac substancias Tuki raime unda axasia-
Tebdes da miewerebodes, es aris absoluturi arseboba. amdenad, metafizi-
kuri filosofiis gansjis umTavres problemas yofierebis substanciuro-
bis da substanciis, rogorc upirvelesi arsebulis, gaazreba warmoadgens.
SeiZleba iTqvas, rom arseboba yvelaze didi da mniSvnelovani (da, ama-
ve dros, yvelaze `Znelad~ gasaazrebeli) Rirebuleba aRmoCnda adamianuri
cnobierebisaTvis, xolo, filosofiis istoria, garkveuli azriT, yofiere-
bis problemis metafizikuri kvlevis, anu, upiratesad, yofierebis substan-
ciurobis kvlevis (rogorc metafizikis) istorias warmoadgens.
78
literatura da SeniSvnebi:
1. , . , 1959 ., ., ., .,
. 7.
2. bertran raseli, filosofiis problemebi, Tb., 2001 w., gv. 134.
3. ix. mag.: . ., , , 1989 .,
. 18-19; . ., , , 1993 ., . 7.
4. aristotele, metafizika, 102 6a, 20-23.
5. filosofiuri Ziebani, XI, Tbilisi, ùniversali~, 2007, gv. 9-18.
6. TevzaZe guram, XX saukunis filosofiis istoria, Tb., Tsu 2002, gv.383.
7. bertran raseli, filosofiis problemebi, Tb., 2001 w., gv. 143-147.
8. filosofiis raobis, misi daniSnulebis, misi funqciisa da saWiroebis Se-
saxeb Tanamedrove etapze, dawvrilebiT ixile: TevzaZe guram, XX saukunis
filosofiis istoria, Tsu 2002, gv. 3-21; begiaSvili arCil, ra aris filo-
sofia. `macne~ filosofiis seria, 2, 2002 weli, gv. 5-19; kodua eduard,
filosofiis Sesavali, Tb., Tsu 1992 weli, gv. 100-138, 202-278; narkvevebi fi-
losofiis istoriaSi, Tbilisi, `ganaTleba~, 1993 weli, gv. 3-16; .
., , , 1989 ., . 5-19;
, , 1990, . 3-28.
9. , , 1990,
. 3.
10. `filosofiis Sesavlis da filosofiis mimarTebis dasaxasiaTeblad metad
mniSvnelovania maTi sagnobrivi sferos Cveneba. filosofia mimarTulia yo-
fierebaze. filosofia yofierebasTan SemecnebiTi mimarTebaa, yofierebis
Teoriaa. filosofiis Sesavali ki mimarTulia filosofiaze. misi amocanaa
gaarkvios filosofiis raoba, is yalibdeba, rogorc filosofiis Teoria.
Tu filosofia upasuxebs kiTxvas ra aris yofiereba da ra sazrisi aqvs
mas? filosofiis Sesavali upasuxebs kiTxvas ra aris filosofia da raSia
misi sazrisi? filosofiis Sesavali filosofiis yofierebis dafuZnebaa, mi-
si gamarTlebaa. is Taviseburi metaTeoriaa, iseTi metaTeoria, romelic ar
scildeba imis farglebs, risi Teoriacaa. filosofiis Sesavali filosofi-
is gareT rom iyos, maSin filosofia ver iqneboda TavisTavis dafuZneba da
gamarTleba da mecnierebis msgavsad sxva instanciidan miiRebda dafuZne-
bas. Tu filosofiis Sesavali filosofiis gareTa instancia iqneboda, mas
TviTon dasWirdeboda misi gaazrebisTvis sxva instancia da a. S. usasrulod.
sinamdvileSi filosofiis Sesavali filosofiis nawilia da misi gziT fi-
losofia iazrebs sakuTar Tavs, amitom filosofias ar sWirdeba gareTa in-
stancia, is TviTrefleqsias mimarTavs da amiT xdeba azrovnebis jaWvis uka-
naskneli rgoli~ (kodua eduard, filosofiis Sesavali, Tb.; Tsu 1992 weli,
gv. 17. aRsaniSnavia, rom dasaxelebuli naSromi warmoadgens filosofiisa
79
da filosofiis Sesavlis raobis Sesaxeb, aseve maTi urTierTdamokidebule-

bis Sesaxeb, yvelaze vrcel mimoxilvas qarTul enaze).
11. dawvrilebiT ixile: . ., , ,
1989 ., . 9.
12. ix.: . ., , , 1993 .
13. avaliani sergi, Teoriuli gonebis struqtura. filosofiuri Ziebani, kre-
buli XII, Tbilisi, universali, 2008, gv. 92.
14. kanti imanuel, wminda gonebis kritika, Tbilisi, 1979 weli, gv., 14.
15. ix.: . ., , , 1989 ., .
9-11; . ., , , 1993 ., c. 9-10.
16. begiaSvili arCil, ra aris filosofia. `macne~ filosofiis seria, 2, 2002
weli, gv. 12-14.
17. aq aucileblad unda iTqvas imis Sesaxeb, rom e. w. `metafilosofiis~ momxre-
ebi metafilosofias `filosofiis Sesavlad~ ar ganixilaven, miuxedavad
imisa, rom maT Soris bevri saerTo SeiZleba daiZebnos. maTTvis `metafi-
losofiis~ mowodeba, funqcia, miznebi da amocanebi ar emTxveva, zogadad,
ama Tu im saxis `filosofiis Sesavlis~ miznebs da amocanebs. am ukanaskne-
lis umTavresi mizania dagvexmaros `filosofosobaSi~, Segviyvanos masSi da
Signidan `dagvaTvalierebinos~ filosofia da, Tanac, Tavad `filosofiuri
TvaliT~, rac dagvexmareba filosofiis `saval gzaze~ dadgomaSi, maSin ro-
ca, `metafilosofiis~ umTavres amocanad misi momxreebi miiCneven filo-
sofiis gacnobas da `daTvalierebas garedan~ da, Tanac, `kerZomecnieruli
TvaliT~, yovelgvari `zedmeti filosofosobis~ gareSe. Tu filosofiis
Sesavali isev da isev filosofiuri tipis azrovnebaa da mis nawils Seadgens
(rogorc filosofiis mier sakuTari Tavis gaazreba), metafilosofia, misi
momxreebis azriT, kerZomecnieruli tipis kvlevaa (rogorc filosofiis
àrafilosofiuri~ gaazreba) da verc ama Tu im filosofiis nawili iqneba da
verc esa Tu is filosofia. is erT-erT axal kerZo mecnierebad unda dafuZ-
ndes sxva kerZo mecnierebaTa Soris, rac, Cveni azriT, uSedego mcdeloba
da `zedmeti wamowyebaa~. filosofiuri azrovneba mxolod filosofiurma
azrovnebam SeiZleba gansajos. es aris misi buneba da mxolod misi SesaZleb-
loba.
18. narkvevebi filosofiis istoriaSi, Tbilisi, `ganaTleba~, 1993 weli, gv. 13.
19. narkvevebi filosofiis istoriaSi, Tbilisi, `ganaTleba~, 1993 weli, gv. 14.
80
VAZHA NIBLADZE
Philosophy as Meta
Sum mary
Almost all great philosophers differently interpret what philosophy is, what it studies,
what is the meaning or justification of its existence is, what differentiates it from scientific know-
ledge or, in general, from other forms of consciousness, etc. But there is a very important prob-
lem that philosophical thinking has always faced, i.e. understanding the problem world-man
(or man-world) as a single whole. Philosophy discusses this wholeness (its components sepa-
rately or in their interrelation) differently from science and this difference is called metaphysical
thinking (pushing to the foreground the comprehension of metaphysical sphere). Philosophy
also discusses this wholeness differently from mythic and religious consciousness do and this
difference is known as the acknowledgement of primacy of the sphere of knowledge (reason,
logic).
Philosophy, like Janus, looks in opposing directions at the same time. Janus-like (in a
positive sense) state of philosophy is expressed in simultaneous looking towards man and the
existent beyond him, towards the past and the future, the beginning and the end, towards the re-
ligious and the scientific (towards physics and metaphysics, mundane and heavenly).
The point of intersection of the religious and the scientific can be called philosophy. It is not
accidental that Bertrand Russell considered philosophy as no mans land which is the apple of
discord between theology and science.
Science is naturally associated with mans practical aims usefulness in the sphere of
everyday life. The importance and value of any science, first of all, is assessed from this point
of view. Philosophy, in this respect, lags behind science (as well as art and religion) since its
usefulness is not as immediate and perceptible as that of achievements of science (or of art and
religion). In this respect, we should recall Aristotles assessment of philosophical knowledge:
All sciences are more necessary than it, but none is better than it. Aristotle understands bet-
terness of philosophy in relation to other sciences as betterness of the reality which is discus-
sed by philosophy in contrast to the reality studied by other sciences. It is the acknowledgement
of the primacy of the metaphysical in contrast to the sphere of physics and it was well known and
established long before Aristotle by Parmenides and especially by Plato whose theory of ideas
remains a classical example of the whole European metaphysics.
As a rule, reasoning about the essence of philosophy, its necessity and destination is itself
a philosophical discourse (a certain kind of philosophy, philosophizing). While, for example, the
theory of religion cannot be a religion, the theory of art is not art, etc. In this respect, philosophy
differs from all other forms of consciousness. Self-reflexivity is its inner nature. The study of
any philosophical problem is preceded (or implies) by a certain answer to the question concer-
81
ning the essence of philosophy and its destination. And this answer remains within the frame of
philosophical thinking and retains its specific features. This means that everything (including its
own essence) is seen by philosophy from the viewpoint of meta. Meta implies transcending
something (leaving its borders) and watching it from outside. Metaphysics is not physics any
more. Meta-mathematics leaves the sphere of mathematics but meta-philosophy still belongs to
philosophical thinking and, in general, is a part of philosophy as one of its branches or as an
introduction to a philosophical system (classical example is Kants criticism), or as a histori-
cal-philosophical vision constructed on the basis of certain positions.
We think that meta-philosophy is a specific instance of the history of philosophy
when one or several particular philosophical problems are analyzed in their historical develop-
ment. In such cases, meta-philosophers, as a rule, mean the problem of the subject matter of
philosophy, on the one hand, and the nature of cognition, on the other.
History of philosophy and philosophy are closer related than e.g. religion and the his-
tory of religion or mathematics and history of mathematics. The history of philosophy is more
philosophical than the history of religion religious, history of mathematics mathematical,
etc. It is so because philosophy has no meta. It itself is meta. A history of something means
observing it from outside. But the history of philosophy means observing its own self by phi-
losophy and therefore it is looking inside and not outside. Therefore, we think that meta-
philosophy is practically a branch of philosophy (and of particular scientific nature). It cannot
transcend the limits of philosophical thinking and judge philosophy from somebody elses
position.
As a rule, the history of philosophy (or something like it) was originally written as a pre-
mise (an introduction) to someones own philosophical theory, as a review of previously existing
philosophical positions. The end of all such historical-philosophical courses was the creation
of a new philosophical conception. The so-called meta-philosophy is such analysis of previous
philosophical thinking from the viewpoint of the essence and destination of philosophy itself, of
specificity of philosophical cognition and its difference from particular scientific cognition.
It is certain that besides transcendental (metaphysical) many other things such as parti-
cular realities of science, religion, art, politics, culture in general, man, nature, etc. (including
philosophical thinking) can be the subjects of philosophical interpretation. The specificity of
philosophy should be looked for here. In particular, though meta-physicality is its main internal
and historical characteristics and philosophy renders thoughts of our consciousness about the
metaphysical (the transcendental), everything that becomes its subject matter in the non-metap-
hysical sphere (first of all, man) is measured in relation to the metaphysical, i.e. is assessed
from metaphysical positions.
Since the kernel of any philosophical doctrine is a certain decision of the problem of
being, the analysis of the problem of being has become the core around which the adventure of
philosophical thinking (as metaphysical vision) with its success and failures is concentrated.
This success and these failures mainly depended on the assumption whether various interpre-
tations of metaphysical aspects of being were convincing and acceptable or not. The analysis
of being as such from the metaphysical point of view, first of all, means raising it to the rank of
substance.
82
Substance for philosophical consciousness means the same as God for religious con-
sciousness. Just as religion depends upon what its God is, what characteristics are attributed to
Him, just like it the attractiveness and strength of philosophy depend on the manner it solves the
problem of substance and, first of all, on the manner in which it solves the problem of relation of
substance to being as such, because if there is anything that is to be characterized and to be attri-
buted to substance is absolute existence. Therefore, the most important problem of metaphysical
discourse is interpreting the substantiality and substance as the primary existent.
It can be said that existence turned out to be the greatest and the most important (and at
the same time difficult) value for human consciousness and the history of philosophy in a cer-
tain sense was formed as a history of metaphysical study of the problem of being or mainly as a
history of study of substantiality of being (as metaphysics).
83
irakli braWuli
religiis filosofiis sami paradigma
1. religiis filosofiis veli
marlen olbraiti Tavis cnobil wignSi religia da msoflio politi-

ka aRniSnavs, rom 21-e saukunis damdegs religiis mniSvnelobaze warmodge-
nas gvaZlevs 2005 wlis 20 ianvars aSS-is prezidentis sainauguracio sityva,
sadac aRniSnulia: kacobriobis istoriaSi iyo Tavisuflebis dacemisa da
aRzevebis periodebi, magram mTlianobaSi is viTardeboda mkafiod gamokve-
Tili gziT, romelic warimarTeba Tavisuflebis ideiT da TviT misi Semqmne-
lis, RmerTis xelmZRvanelobiT. religiis filosofiis ZiriTadi kiTxve-
bia: vin/ra aris RmerTi? SeiZleba Tu ara RmerTis arsebobis dasabuTeba?
xelmZRvanelobs Tu ara RmerTi Tavisive Seqmnil samyaros?
ratom dauSva RmerTma boroteba da tanjva Tavis Seqmnil samyaroSi?
T. dostoevski Tavis romanSi Zmebi karamazovebi gvixatavs did in-
kvizitors, romelic amtkicebs, rom eklesia emyareba sam burjs: saidumlo,
saswauli da avtoriteti. samive maTgani brma rwmenis nairsaxeobebia. fi-
losofosebs ar uyvarT, roca maT azrebs vinme ganagebs. isini yvelaferSi
cxvirs yofen, yvelafris gamokvleva, gaCxreka surT. filosofiis 26-sau-
kunovan tradiciaSi dagrovda religiis fenomenis Seswavlis mdidari ga-
mocdileba. sul SeiZleba gamovyoT religiis filosofiis ori varianti:
erTi variantis mixedviT RmerTis arsebobis dasabuTeba SeuZlebelia, me-
ore variantis mixedviT ki aseTi ram SesaZlebelia. religiis filosofiis
orive gzas Tavisi gamarTleba aqvs, Tavisi warmomadgenlebi yavs, Tavisi ar-
gumentebi aqvs.
TviT RmerTma ineba Cemi gaxdoma aSS-is prezidentad ganacxada
j.buSma, 2005 wels. amis gamo bevrma moqalaqem Tavi uxerxulad igrZno, rad-
gan zustad imaves ambobda erayeli diqtatori sadam huseinic. vinc istori-
as icnobs, man isic icis, raoden saSiSni arian adamianebi, Tavis Tavs RvTis
rCeuls rom uwodeben da moTxovnileba aqvT sicocxleSive daidgan Zeglebi
quCebsa da moednebze. ara imdenad religia, ramdenadac religiis esa Tu is
gageba araerTxel gamxdara xalxTa Soris uTanxmoebis mizezi.
konservatorebi da liberalebi dResac kamaToben religiam ufro
meti roli unda Seasrulos Tu ufro naklebi 21-e saukunis sazogadoeba-
Si?! TiTqos am sakiTxze arsebobs uTanxmoeba amerikelebsa da evropelebs
Soris. TiTqos evropa ufro saero regionia, xolo amerikaSi religiuro-
84
irakli braWuli _ religiis filosofiis sami paradigma
ba dominirebs. sinamdvileSi amerikul regulirebasa da evropul seku-

larizms Soris arc iseTi didi gansxvavebaa. 21-e saukuneSi amerika sulac
ar gamxdara Teoretikuli, xolo evropa uRmerTo da aTeisturi. saSualo
evropeli ufro frTxilad ekideba religiisa da politikis kavSirs, vidre
saSualo amerikeli. amerikelTa umravlesobisaTvis sityva religias mxo-
lod dadebiTi mniSvneloba aqvs. is daaxloebiT ase fiqrobs: samyaro da
Cven yvelani RmerTma Segvqmna, amitom TiToeul Cvengans TviTon Semoqmedma
mianiWa Seuvali uflebebi sicocxlis ufleba, Tavisuflebis ufleba da
sakuTrebis ufleba. am Seuvali uflebebis pirvelwyaros saxelia RmerTi.
ai, es aris amerikuli religiurobis safuZveli. amerikelebs ara aqvT ga-
datanili is, rac evropam gadaitana religiuri omebi, saeklesio ganxeTqi-
leba, barTlomes Rame da inkviziciis saSinelebani.
religiuria adamiani, visac swams absoluturi WeSmaritebis arseboba,
magram SeiZleba ki iseTma SezRudulma, mokvdavma arsebam, rogoric adamia-
nia, Seicnos abosuluturi WeSmariteba? ramdenad sworad esmoda religiis
arsi, magaliTad al-qaidas liders usama bin-ladens, roca islami saerTa-
Soriso terorizmis droSad gamoiyena? sworad esmoda inkviziciis general
ignacio loiolas kaTolicizmi, roca eretikosebs koconze agzavnida?
rogor esmoda marTlmadidebloba slobodan miloSeviCs, roca masze ape-
lirebda balkaneTis samoqalaqo omebSi, 90-ian wlebSi? rogor gaigo pro-
testantuli qristianoba norvegielma andreas breivikma, roca 87 bavSvi
mokla 2011 wels?
ramdenadac Cven am kiTxvebze pasuxebi gvainteresebs, ukve vimyofebiT
religiis filosofiis problemaTa velSi, magram Cven viwyebT religiis fi-
losofiis, rogorc akademiuri disciplinis, Seswavlas. marTalia, es sfe-
roebi erTmaneTisgan gansxvavdeba, rogorc cxovreba da filosofia, magram
amave dros maT Soris kavSiricaa.
imanuel kantis mixedviT, filosofiam pasuxi unda gasces oTx mTavar
kiTxvas: ra SemiZlia vicode? ra unda vakeTo? risi imedi SeiZleba mqondes?
ra var me, rogorc adamaini? religiis filosofiam unda upasuxos mesame
kiTxvas: risi imedi SeiZleba mqondes sikvdilis Semdeg? Cveni ganwyobebi,
molodinebi, rwmena da mrwamsi Tavsebadia gonebasTan da Sinagan kavSirSia
adamianis yofierebis sxva mxareebTan. am kavSirebis gaSuqeba religiis fi-
losofiuri mkvlevris saqmea.
2. ZiriTadi cnebebis winaswari ganmarteba
vidre sagnis arsebiTi Sinaarsis ganxilvaze gadavidodeT, saWiroa wi-

naswar ganimartos sami ZiriTadi cneba: religia, filosofia da religiis
filosofia.
85
adamians axasiaTebs moTxovnileba, gaigos da Seimecnos samyaro, gas-

cdes xiluli samyaros sazRvrebs, swamdes da SeuerTdes maradiulobas,
daZlios sicocxlis sasruloba. es moTxovnilebebi aqvT yvela epoqisa da
civilizaciis adamianebs. icvleba mxolod maTi dakmayofilebis pirobebi.
es qmnis adamianuri yofierebis religiur aspeqts. TviT laTinuri termini
religia mogvianebiT damkvidrda. arsebobs ramdenime mosazreba misi war-
momavlobis da mniSvnelobis Sesaxeb. cicerons miaCnda, rom religia nawar-
moebia laTinuri zmnidan religare (xelaxla Sekvra, kvlav dakavSireba), rac
gadataniTi mniSvnelobiT niSnavs raimesadmi gansakuTrebul yuradRebas,
pativiscemas, mowiwebas, mokrZalebas, Tayvaniscemas, RvTismosaobas. netari
avgustines ganmartebiT, Religare niSnavs xelaxla SemoerTebas, RmerTTan
kavbSiris aRdgena-ganaxlebas. RmerTis Zieba, rac axasiaTebs adamianis bu-
nebas, hgavs uZRebi Svilis dabrunebis igavSi gamoTqmul viTarebas. morwmu-
ne eZiebs Semoqmeds, imas, rasTanac imTaviTvea kavSirSi da kvlav poulobs,
kvlav ubrundeba Semoqmedis wiaRs. aqedan warmoiSva TviT religiis saxel-
wodebac, romelic aRniSnavs rwmenis ideebisa da wes-Cveulebebis sistemas.
filosofia Zv. w. VI saukuneSi warmoiSva saberZneTSi. TviT termini
sityvasityviT sibrZnis siyvaruls niSnavs. gadmocemis mixedviT, pirvelad
piTagoras uxmaria, yovel SemTxvevaSi, piTagorelTa wreSi warmoSobila.
amiT piTagoram aRniSna is garemoeba, rom filosofia aris azrovnebis spe-
cifikuri wesi, romelic gulisxmobs WeSmaritebis mudmiv Ziebas, mis moyva-
reobas, trfials, xolo brZeni mxolod RmerTi SeiZleba iyos. filosofiis
mravali gansazRvreba arsebobs. CvenTvis sainteresoa, ras erqva filosofia
antikuri epoqisa da kulturis konteqstSi, radgan swored maSin warmoiSva
filosofiasTan religiis urTierTdamokidebulebis problema. problema
gamoikveTa monoaTeisturi bibliuri religiebis warmoSobisa da dominan-
tad gaxdomis epoqaSi.
filosofia SeiZleba ewodos adamianis mcdelobas, gonebrivi unarebis
gziT gaigos da axsnas universumi, romelSic is cxovrobs, wvdes kosmosis
saidumloebebs da gansazRvros qcevis wesi (eTikurisa da politikuris CaT-
vliT), romelsac SeuZlia adamianis (mikrokosmosis) cxovrebis srulyofa.
mogvianebiT filosofia daiSala Teoriul da praqtikul disciplinebad:
metafizikad, eTikad da logikad. ufro mogvianebiT, me-18 saukuneSi warmo-
iSva religiis filosofia, rogorc damoukidebeli filosofiuri discip-
lina. misi mizandasaxuloba iyo pasuxi gaeca kiTxvebze: ra aris da rogori
unda iyos religia? mas hqonda rogorc religiis kritikuli ganxilvis fun-
qcia, aseve apologeturi funqcia, religiuri mrwamsis gonebis argumen-
tebiT damcveli da gamamarTlebeli funqcia.
86
3. aTena da ierusalimi
religiis da filosofiis winaswari ganmartebis Semdeg ganvmartoT

termin Teologiis RvTismetyvelebis Sinaarsic. Zveli berZnuli filo-
sofia Seicavda Teologiis elementebsac da ganuyofeli iyo misgan. SeiZle-
ba iTqvas, rom is Taviseburi Teologiac (RmerTis Sesaxeb moZRvreba) iyo,
romelic elinuri religiuri cnobierebis ganviTarebaSi mniSvnelovan
rols TamaSobda. sityva teos-iT upiratesad aRiniSneboda is, rac adamianur-
ze aRmatebulia, maradiulia, sikvdilze da warmavalze metia; is uzenaesi
Zalaa, romelic moqmedebs samyaroSi. elinur samyaroSi sityva Teologi
sxvadasxva rames aRniSnavda. ase iwodebodnen: orakulebi, misnebi, Teura-
gebi da filosofosnic; sxvadasxva mimdinareobis filosofosebi piTago-
relebi, sofistebi, epikurelebi, skeptikosebi, TviT platoni da aristote-
lec, isini, vinc TavianT TxzulebebSi msjeloben RvTaebrivis bunebaze.
monoaTeisturi bibliuri religiebis warmoSobisa da damkvidrebis
procesSi xdeba termin Teologiis Sinaarsis gansazRvra. upirveles yov-
lisa, misi mkafio gamijvna filosofiisagan, rogorc warmarTuli azrovne-
bis wesisagan. bibliaSi is moxsenebulia, rogorc elinTa sibrZne. am ori
sferos sistematuri gamijvnis aRsaniSnavad warmoiSva aTena da ierusali-
mis metafora.
aTena aris sworad azrovnebis elinuri wesis simbolo, xolo ieru-
salimi aRniSnavs bibliuri gamocxadebis religias. III saukunidan mkvid-
rdeba Teologiis bibliuri mniSvneloba. Teologia is, vinc RmerTis STa-
gonebis ZaliT qadagebs RmerTis nebas. aseTebi iyvnen: mose, esaia, daviT
mefsalmune da bibliis sxva winaswarmetyvelni. mogvianebiT, II-III saukunee-
bidan Teologi ewodeba imas, vinc eweva RmerTis sityvis, bibliis egzege-
bas anu ganmartebas, komentirebas. bibliis ganmmarteblebs, komentatorebs,
egzegetikosebs ewodaT Teologebi. bibliis ganmmartebel eklesiis mamaTa
cxovrebisa da Semoqmedebis Seswavlas ewoda patristika. zogi mas Teolo-
giis nawilad Tvlis, radgan dogmaturi sakiTxebis gagebasa da gaRrmavebas
isaxavs miznad. zogi Tanamedrove avtori mas istoriul-kritikuli kvleve-
bis dargad miiCnevs da egzegetebis (ganmmarteblebis) saqmianobisgan gan-
sxvavebiT aRniSnavs terminiT patrologia.
azrovnebis mTel tradicias qmnian eklesiis mamebi, romlebic filo-
sofiis daxmarebiT cdiloben ganmarton biblia, agreTve daicvan araswori
ganmartebisagan, yalbismqmneebisagan, eresebisagan da religiis oponente-
bisagan, urwmuno warmarTebis mxriv uaryofisagan. Teologia am aspeqtSi
aris apologetika. am epoqaSi gaimijna qristianuli filosofia da gare-
SeTa sibrZne, elinTa sibrZne anu warmarTuli filosofia.
87
eklesiis mamebi Teologebs, bibliis ganmmarteblebs qristian filo-

sofosebs uwodebdnen. aseT Teologebs qristiani filosofosi ewodaT,
radgan TiToeuli maTgani kargad icnobda berZnul filosofias da mas qris-
tianobis Sesavlad aRiqvamda; cdilobda ara marto mociqulTa da winaswar-
metyvelTa eniT, aramed filosofiuri msjelobis gamoyenebiT mkiTxveli
gonebisaTvis misawvdomi rwmenis sazRvrebamde mieyvana. msoflio eklesiis
didma moZRvrebma: basili didma, ioane oqropirma, grigol RvTismetyvel-
ma, grigol noselma RvTismetyvelebis kabadokielma mnaTobebma gadam-
wyveti wvlili Seitanes msoflio saeklesio krebebis mier qristianuli
religiis dogmatis Camoyalibebasa da formulirebaSi. isini filosofias
iyenebdnen religiuri mrwamsis formulirebaSi. basili didma specialuri
naSromic ki dawera imis Taobaze, rogor unda miiRos sargebloba axalgaz-
rdam warmarTuli literaturidan. basili didi filosofias wyalSi arek-
lil mzes adarebs, romelsac Tvali unda SevaCvioT, raTa Semdeg namdvili
mzis Wvreta SevZloT. qarTveli hagiografi giorgi merCule grigol xan-
ZTelis Sesaxeb gadmogvcems, rom saRmrTo wignni zepiriT moiwurTna. xo-
lo sibrZneca igi amis soflisa filosofosTa iswava keTilad da romel po-
vos sityvai keTili Seiwynaros, xolo jervali ganadidos.
msoflio saeklesio krebebis epoqaSi ( I msoflio saeklesio kreba Ca-
tarda 325 w. konstantinepolSi, ukanaskneli VII kreba nikeaSi 787 wels) mox-
da qristianobis elinizacia da filosofiis qristianizacia. xSirad miuTi-
Teben, rom mTeli dasavluri civilizaciis safuZvels Seadgens berZnuli
filosofia da qristianuli religia, bibliuri eTika, Zveli aRTqmis funda-
menturi moraluri kanonebi da axali aRTqmidan momdinare pirovnebis uze-
naesi Rirebulebis idea.
qristiani filosofosi mxolod epiTetia, niSnavs ganswavlul, mwig-
nobar Teologs, RmerTis sityvis ganmmartebels, egzegetikoss, radgan
TviT qristea uzenaesi da WeSmariti sibrZne (sofia) da RmerTis pirveli
manmmartebeli, pirveli egzegetikosi, qristea RmerTis sityva logo-
si, maSasadame, WeSmariti filosofosi SeiZleba iyos mxolod qristiani
RvTismetyveli.
ai, am istoriul konteqstSi warmoiSva azrovnebis or formas Soris
aTena da ierusalims Soris urTierTdamokidebulebis problema, rac Se-
iZleba gavigoT, rogorc codnisa da rwmenis, filosofiisa da religiis
urTierTmimarTebis problema. codnis da rwmenis urTierTmimarTebis gan-
sazRvra gaxda ara marto Sua saukuneTa filosofiis, aramed, saerTod, ada-
mianis azrovnebis erT-erTi umTavresi amocana.
88
4. RmerTi abraamisa, isaakisa da iakobisa da filosofosTa

RmerTi
filosofosTa da TeologTa azri orad aris gayofili. mudam iyvnen,

dResac arian da albaT momavalSic iqnebian Rrma religiuri moazrovne-
ni, romlebic Seuwynareblad Tvlian am ori urTierTsapirispiro goniTi
unaris morigebas. sarwmunoebas ar sWirdeba gonebis mtkicebulebani, sak-
marisia wm. werilis anu gamocxadebis mtkicebuleba, is rac bibliaSi winas-
warmetyvelebma da mociqulebma anu WeSmaritma RvTismetyvelebma RvTis
STagonebiT gvauwyes da gviqadages. maT Soris yvelaze ukompromiso mimar-
Tulebis poziciaa gamoxatuli II saukunis Teolog tertulianes formuli-
rebaSi: credo yuia abscrdum (mwams, radgan absurdia). tertuliane xelaRebiT
uaryofda filosofias, wyevlida sokrates, platons, aristoteles; moiTx-
ovda maTi Txzulebebis akrZalvas. saero filosofiur literaturas RvTis
winaSe sigiJed Tvlida. es ukiduresi damcveli qristianuli moZRvrebis
siwmindisa, Semdgom cdomilebebSi Cavarda, ramac is eklesiidan gandgomam-
de miiyvana. mogvianebiT paskalma gamoTqva aseTi pozicia: RmerTi abraami-
sa, RmerTi isaakisa da RmerTi iakobisa da ara filosofosTa da mwignobarTa
RmerTi. paskali gveubneba, rom religiis arsi idumaleba da miuwvdomlo-
baa, namdvili RmerTi, qristianuli religiis RmerTi mudam darCeba dafa-
rul, idumal, Seucnobel RmerTad. kirkegori amtkicebda, rom religia go-
nebisaTvis aris didi paradoqsi, romlis Serbilebac ki religiis uaryofas
da adamianis religiuri cxovrebis dangrevas gamoiwvevs.
imave pozicias gamoxatavda islamis religiis damcveli sulTani mah-
mud II. man brZana daewvaT aleqsandriis biblioTeka, radgan, misi Sexedule-
biT, Tu am wignebSi igive weria, rac yuranSi, maS ra saWironi arian isini, xo-
lo, Tu yuranisagan gansxvavebuli ram weria, miT umetes ar arian saWiro.
aseTive pozicia gamoTqva agnosticizmis mxridan me-17 saukunis in-
gliselma filosofosma devid hiumma. is Tvlida, rom: Cveni wminda sarwmu-
noeba unda daemyaros mxolod rwmenas. RmerTze araferi SeiZleba iTqvas,
garda imisa, rac gvauwyes bibliaSi winaswarmetyvelebma. ar unda davuSvaT
sarwmunoebis gatana gonebis samsjavroze, radgan religia ver gauZlebs
gonebis kritikas, amitom unda CamoviSoroT religiis es saeWvo da saSiSi
oponenti. hiumic Tvlida, rom biblioTekebidan unda amoviRoT da davwvaT
yvela is wigni, romelic gonebis argumentebis saSualebiT cdilobs daasa-
buTos RmerTis arseboba.
tertulianes sapirispiro poziciis klasikur formilirebas gvaZlevs
netari avgustine: Intellege ut creas. Creas ut intelleges ( gaige, raTa gwamdes; gwam-
des, raTa gaigo); rwmena miiswrafvis codnisaken, gagebisaken, xolo codna,
gageba rwmenisaken.
89
5. religiis filosofiis sami paradigma
Sua saukuneebSi samive dominanturi monoaTeisturi msoflio religia

qristianoba, iudaizmi da islami cdilobs Tavisi dogmebi daasabuTos go-
nebis mtkicebulebebiT da amisaTvis iyenebs warmarTul elinur filosofi-
as. am filosofiis, rogorc Teologiis winasafexuris preTeologiis kon-
cefcia Camoayaliba klimenti aleqsandrielma. miuxedavad imisa, rom eli-
nebs gamocxadebis WeSmariteba ar hqondaT uwyebuli, maT ~sjuli ar icod-
nen, ar miecaT sjuli~, isini bunebiTi sjulis, gonebis bunebiTi sinaTlis
(lumen naturalis) meSveobiT wvdnen WeSmaritebis marcvlebs (romelTa Sjuli
ara aqun, da bunebiTsa mas Sjulsa hyofdes rom. 2.13-14), amitom samive mo-
noaTeisturi msoflio religia Tavis samsaxurSi ayenebs filosofias, rac
gamoTqmulia formuliT: filosofia ancila oltologia (filosofia Teologiis msa-
xuria). am moZraobas ewoda sqolastika, anu RmerTis arsebobis damtkiceba
filosofiis gamoyenebis gziT.
qristianuli filosofia anselmi kenterberieli, Toma aqvineli.
iudaizmis filosofia mose maimonde platonisa da aristoteles
moZRvrebaTa gamoyenebiT cdilobs daasabuTos iudaizmis religi-
is dogmebi.
islamis filosofia arabul filosofiasac uwodeben (avicena,
al-farabi),misi amocanaa aristoteles moZRvrebaze dayrdnobiT
islamis religiis dasabuTeba da ganmarteba.
RmerTis arsebobis dasabuTebis SesaZleblobis momxreebma filoso-
fia gansazRvres rogorc racionaluri Teologia. RmerTis dasabuTebis
sakiTxze mravalsaukunovani kamaTis Sedegad Camoyalibda sakiTxis gadawy-
vetis ramdenime varianti.
aTeizmi RmerTis ararsebobis dasabuTeba, agnosticizmi SeuZle-
belia dasabuTdes rogorc RmerTis arseboba, ise misi ararseboba; deizmi
RmerTma Seqmna samyaro, magram Semdeg aRar ereva mis arsebobaSi; panTeizmi
RmerTi yvelaferSia. panTeizmis formulad iTvleba spinozas debuleba:
dues Sive natura RmerTi anu buneba.
sqolastikaSi Camoyalibda ormagi WeSmaritebis Teoria. am Teoriis
klasikuri varianti Seqmna Toma aqvinelma. arsebobs gonebis anu filoso-
fiuri (mecnieruli) WeSmariteba da Teologiuri, gamocxadebis WeSmarite-
ba. orive maTganis wyaroa RmerTi, amitom maT Soris ar SeiZleba arsebobdes
gardauvali winaaRmdegoba.
sqolastikaSi Camoyalibda RmerTis arsebobis mravali mtkicebuleba,
maT Soris yvelaze cnobilia:
a) ontologiuri mtkicebuleba. RmerTis cnebaSi Sedis misi arseboba;
b) pirvelmizezis mtkicebuleba yvelafers aqvs Tavisi mizezi, amitom unda
90
arsebobdes pirvelmizezi, romelic iqneba Tavisi Tavis mizezi. yvelafris

pirvelmizezi aris RmerTi; g) teleologiuri anu Canafiqris mtkicebule-
ba. samyaroSi yvelaferi agebulia mizanSewonilobis principiT, ise, TiTqos
is viRac gonierma arsebam Caifiqra.
sqolastika XI-XIII saukuneebSi ganviTarebis apoTeozs aRwevs da misi
dacema iwyeba XV saukunidan. XVI saukuneSi sqolastika emxoba. xorcielde-
ba Teologiis batonobidan filosofiis emansipacia (ganTavisufleba) anu
iwyeba religiis filosofiis sekularizacia, gasaeroeba, gonebis da samo-
qalaqo sazogadoebis velze gadatana; dgeba sekularuli humanizmis da gan-
manaTleblobis epoqa. axal sekularul konteqstSi iqmneba religiis filo-
sofiis axali paradigma, romlis amocanaa religiis kritika. goneba iqceva
religiis arbitrad. germanuli klasikuri idealizmis wiaRSi iqmneba reli-
giis filosofiis sistemebi. Seiqmna ori klasikuri Txzuleba:
i. kantis religia mxolod gonebis farglebSi. es aris religiis
eTikuri arsebis gamokvleva.
g.v.f. hegelis leqciebi religiis filosofiaSi, masSi gamokvle-
ul iqna religiis racionaluri arseba.
kantis da hegelis TxzulebebSi moxazulia religiuri cnobierebis
universaluri sawyisebi. sqolastikuri strategia gulisxmobda gonebis mi-
er RmerTis arsebobis dasabuTebas, xolo axali strategia gulisxmobs re-
ligiis kritikas, misi gaumjobesebis reformas. religis Seswavla da Semec-
neba mecnierul safuZvelze gadadis. yvela religia erTiani sistemis cal-
keul paragrafebad gaiazreba.
sqolastikaSi SemuSavebuli RmerTis idea dausabamo, usasrulo, yo-
velives Semoqmedi, mizezi, arseba, sicocxle da ganmgebeli am axal seku-
larul paradigmaSi ganmartebul iqna, rogorc gonebis idea. RmerTis idea
klasikur germanul filosofiaSi gadaiqca subieqtis TviTkonstruirebis
momentad, adamianis TviTganxorcielebis Tvalsawierad, romelic cdilobs
Tavisuflebac ar dakargos da usasrulobasTan kavSiric SeinarCunos.
religia gagebul iqna, rogorc kacobriobis istoriuli ganviTarebis
erT-erTi safexuri, kulturisa da sazogadoebrivi cnobierebis erT-er-
Ti forma, xolo eklesia, rogorc erT-erTi sazogadoebrivi dawesebule-
ba. daiwyo religiaTa klasifikacia mis primitiul da ganviTarebul for-
mebad. primitiuli religiuri formebia: animizmi, sulieri Tvisebebis mi-
wera bunebis movlenebisadmi; fetiSizmi cxovelebisa da mcenareebisadmi
zebunebrivi Tisebebis miwera; totebizmi jadoqroba, grZneuleba, magia,
Selocva da magiuri ritualebis Sedegad bunebis movlenebze da adamianis
cxovrebaze zemoqmedeba.
religiis filosofiis sekularul-ganmanaTlebluri paradigma dai-
nerga XIX s. 30-40-ian wlebSi. hegelis sistema afeTqda. is aafeTqes hege-
91
lis mowafeebma: l. foierbaxma, s. kirgegorma, m. Stirnerma, k.marqsma, agreT-

ve f.nicSem, f. Slairmaxerma da sxvebma. l.foierbaxma Semoitana anTropo-
logiuri principi. religiis pozitiuri kritika Secvala negatiuri kriti-
kiT. religiis arseba, misi azriT, aris adamianis arseba gaucxoebuli saxiT
warmodgenili. adamiani Tavisive ideas eTayvaneba RmerTis saxiT. amitom
religiis filosofiam unda gaacnobieros es gaucxoeba da religia kvlav
anTropologiad gadaaqcios.
XIX saukunis meore naxevridan iwyeba religiis filosofiis sekularu-
li paradigmis Secvla misi postsekularuli paradigmiT, romelic religiis
apologiisa da kritikis miRma irCevs axal strategias, samyaros religiuri
valentobis reaqtualizaciis (ganaxlebis) strategias. fridrih Slaierma-
xeridan moyolebuli, yuradRebis centrSi eqceva religiuri cda (gamoc-
dileba, experiens) da misi Sinagani Rirebuleba. huserlis gamokvlevebis gav-
leniT fenomenologiuri meTodi aqtiurad gamoiyeneba religiis filoso-
fiaSi. SeiZleba iTqvas, rom religiis filosofia gadadis religiis feno-
menologiaSi. religiis fenomenologia amodis ara uzenaesi arsebis Sesaxeb
spekulatiuri cnebis Sedgenis amocanebidan, aramed gvevlineba religiuri
gamocdilebis gagebisa da interpretaciis Teoriad da meTodologiad.
6. aris Tu ara filosofia racionaluri Teologia
RmerTma Cemi Seqmnisas, CemSi Cado

RmerTis idea, rogorc tvifari, romliTac
xelosani aRbeWdavs xolme Tavis qmnilebas
rene dekarte
axali drois gariJraJze fiqrobdnen, rom RmerTma dawera ori wigni,

ori manuskripti: wminda werili, romlis meSveobiTac Tavis nebas gvimxels
da buneba, samyaro, romlis meSveobiTac Tavis Zalmosilebas gvimxels. bu-
neba aris universaluri teqsti. misi wakiTxva rom viswavloT, saWiroa im an-
banis codna, romlis meSveobiTac Cawerilia es teqsti. am wignis gageba Se-
uZlebelia, Tu manamde ar Seiswavle is ena da asoebi, romliTac is daiwera.
am wignis ena maTematikaa, xolo asoebi samkuTxedebi, wreebi da sxva geomet-
riuli figurebi (galilei, bekoni). maSasadame, arsebobs RmerTis Semecne-
bis ori gza: bibliis wakiTxva, ganmarteba da gageba da RmerTis Semecneba
gaSualebuli gziT misi qmnilebis wakiTxva-gamokvleva. bunebis Semecnebis
organoa RmerTis mierve adamianSi Canergili gonebis bunebiTi naTeli (lu-
men naturalis). am bunebiTi unaris meSveobiT samyaros pirvelmizezis moazre-
ba aris racionaluri Teologia.
92
filosofia, rogorc racionaluri Teologia, iyofa orad: deistu-

rad da Teisturad. deistebi aRiareben, rom pirvelmizezis Semecneba SesaZ-
lebelia martooden gonebiT, magram adamianuri gonebis mier moazrebuli
RmerTis cneba SefardebiTia, RmerTi aris arseba, romlis yvelganmyofi re-
aloba zustad veRar ganisazRvreba gonebiT. Teisti aRiarebs, rom gonebiT
SeuZlia RmerTi zustad gansazRvros bunebasTan analogiiT, amas bunebrivi
Teologia ewodeba. RmerTi aris arseba, romelic Tavis TavSi Seicavs yve-
la sxva nivTis pirvel safuZvels. deistebi masSi warmoidgenen samyaros mi-
zezs, xolo Teistebi samyaros Semoqmeds.
bunebriv TeologiaSi unda ganvasxvavoT kosmologia da teleolo-
gia. RmerTis arsebobis kosmologiur mtkicebulebas samyaros wesrigidan
gamohyavs uzenaesi moazrovne arsebis idea, xolo teleologia samyaros
Canafiqris mixedviT Seqmnas gulisxmobs. sqolastikur proeqtebSi gamo-
yenebul iqna rogorc kosmologiuri, ise teleologiuri mtkicebulebebi,
romlebic platonisa da aristoteles Txzulebebidan iReben saTaves. yve-
la arsebuls aqvs Tavisi mizezi, am ukanasknels ki Tavisi. mizezTa jaWvis
bolos mivdivarT pirvelmizezis daSvebamde, romelic TviTon aris Tavisi
Tavis mizezi (causa sui).
anselm kenterberiels (1033-1109 ww.) miewereba e.w. ontologiuri ar-
gumentis Seqmna. anselmi acxadebda, rom is gonebis naTelze dayrdnobiT
daasabuTebda RmerTis arsebobas. (5) anselmis argumenti aris me-13 fsal-
munis im muxlis komentari, romelic ambobs: Tqva ugunurma Tavis gulSi:
ar aris RmerTi. RmerTis uaryofa ugunurebaa, anu gonebis kanonebs ewi-
naaRmdegeba, ratom? RmerTi gonebisTvis aris yovladsrulyofili arsebis
cneba, amitom SeuZlebelia, rom mas gamoakldes arsebobis predikati.
anselmis argumentis ufro martivi varianti Camoayaliba rene dekar-
tem: vazrovneb, maSasadame varsebob. is ueWvelesi, ucxadesi da Tavi-
si Tavis TviTdamfuZnebeli debulebaa, rasac gonebis intuicia, anu bune-
biTi sinaTle (lamen naturalis) Wvrets. Tavis mesame meditaciaSi, romelsac
ewodeba RmerTis Sesaxeb mtkicebuleba, rom is arsebobs, dekarte ambobs:
RmerTis ideac aris gonebis bunebrivi naTlis evidencia. amis axsna SeiZleba
srulyofili manqanis analogiiT, manqana gulisxmobs ostats, romelmac is
Seqmna.
ontologiuri argumenti mravaljer gaakritikes im argumentiT, rom
cnebaSi arseboba ar Sedis. SeiZleba azrSi gqondes 300 taleris cneba, magram
jibeSi arc erTi taleri ar gqondes (kanti). hegelma mTeli Tavisi sistema,
ontologiuri argumentis aRdgenaze daamyara. mxolod absolutis cneba
gulisxmobs arsebobas (da ara sxva ramis cneba). gonebis arseba cnebaSia, ab-
solutis cneba ki gonebis yovladZlierebis cnebaa. amaTi religia gadadis
religiis filosofiaSi, RmerTis cnebamde amaRlebul TviTcnobierebaSi.
93
maSasadame, filosofia religiis igiveobrivia, filosofia racionalu-

ri Teologiaa, romelic religias ganvlil safexurad acxadebs. WeSmarit
RmerTad gamocxadebulia filosofosTa RmerTi. am sabediswero daskvnis
winaaRmdeg bevrma moazrovnem gamoTqva Tavisi azri. hegelis sistema TviT
misma mowafeebma aafeTqes.
7. sindisi, rogorc gonebis farglebSi SesaZlo religiis RmerTi
me vamtkiceb, rom gonebis spekulatiuri gamoyenebis

yovelgvari cda TeologiaSi unayofoa... Tu safuZvlad
ar davudebT moralur kanonebs, maSin arsad araviTari
gonebis Teologia ar SeiZleba arsebobdes
imanuel kanti
kantma Tavis filosofiur reformas safuZvlad daudo ontologiu-

ri mtkicebulebis kritika, amave kontrangumentis safuZvelze, rom cnebaSi
ar Sedis arseboba. adamianuri gonebis uZlureba da ugunuroba, daamtkicos
uzenaesi gonieri arsebis arseboba, aseve niSnavs misi sapirispiros damtki-
cebis uunarobasac. amdenad, uzenaesi arseba gonebis wminda spekulatiuri
gamoyenebisTvis rCeba mxolod cnebad, romelic amTavrebs da agvirgvinebs
adamianuri codnis Senobas. am idealis obieqtur realobas, marTalia, ver
daamtkiceb, magram, verc uaryof.
kantis mixedviT, RmerTi aris zneobrivi wesrigis principi. zneobrivi
kanonebi ki ar gulisxmoben winamZRvrad samyaros uzenaesi gamgeblis arse-
bobas, aramed, piriqiT, uzenaesi arsebis arsebobis mtkicebuleba zneobriv
kanons emyareba. moraluri kanonebi araTu gulisxmoben umaRlesi arsebis
arsebobas, aramed aucileblad apostulireben mas, oRond mxolod eTiku-
rad. RmerTis idea moraluri aucileblobaa.
RmerTi, rogorc umaRlesi nivTi, arsebaTa arseba, yvela sxva nivTTa
arsebobis SesaZleblobis umaRlesi piroba, risi moazrebac SesaZlebelia
adamianuri gonebis mier, racionaluri Teologiis sagani iyo. amaSia mi-
si mTavari cdomileba. racionaluri Teologia cru mecnierebaa. RmerTis
idea ar gveubneba imas, Tu ra SeiZleba iyos misi Sesabamisi sagani realobaSi.
kantis azriT, RmerTis ideas ar SeiZleba rame Seesabamebodes cdaSi, amitom
Teoriuli codna RmerTis Sesaxeb gamoricxulia. magram, es ar niSnavs imas,
rom RmerTis ideas ara aqvs araviTari moxmareba adamianis gonebaSi. Rmer-
Tis idea mxolod regulaturia da ara konstituciuri, is empiriul cdas ar
akonstituirebs. kantma luTeris protestantuli revolucia filosofi-
aSi gadmoitana. RmerTis cneba Secvala sindisis cnebiT. WeSmariti qristi-
anuli religiuri Temi, axali israeli anu eklesia SeiZleba iyos mxolod
94
moraluri kacobrioba. qristianoba moraluri religiaa aRmsareblur da

dogmatur RvTismetyvelebasTan yovelgvari kavSiris gareSe. RmerTi, ro-
gorc zneobrivi wesrigis pirvelwyaro da absoluturi moraluri arseba,
avtonomiuri gonebis praqtikuli postulatia. religiis sakulto, sawes-
Cveulebo da organizaciul-ierarqiuli institutebi saxarebis uwyebis
Suqze, kantis azriT, aris religiuri cnobierebis primitiul safexurze
dabruneba.
protestantebma erTmaneTs daupirispires dogmatur-aRmsarebluri
RvTismetyveleba, romelic rwmenis dogmats garegani iZulebis saxiT awvdis
morwmunes, da sindisis RvTismetyveleba, Sinagani rwmena Suamavlebis ga-
reSe, realizebuli moraluri kanonis SesrulebaSi da wm. werilis indivi-
dualur gagebaSi, gancdasa da ganmartebaSi. eTikuri religiis ideam kidev
ufro gaaRrmava dasavluri civilizaciis sekuralizaciis procesi, rasac
mohyva samyaros religiuri valentobis daqveiTeba da kulturis dekadan-
si. paul tilixi SeniSnavs, rom ontologiuri argumentis dangreviT, kantma
religiuri cnobierebis dangrevas Seuwyo xeli.
8. religiuri filosofia
Znelia Tanamedrove religiis filosofiis mkafio gamijvna Tanamed-

rove religiuri filosofiisa da Teologebisagan. 1879 wels 4 agvistos ro-
mis papis leon XIII enciklikam Toma aqvinelis Sromebi erTaderT WeSmarit
filosofiur moZRvrebad gamoacxada da Tavis mrevls misi Seswavlisaken
mouwoda. Tomisturi kvlevebis centrebi gaixsna evropisa da aSS-s mraval
universitetSi. Tanamedrove neoTomizmma bevri ram aiRo XX filosofiis
sxvadasxva mimdinareobisagan. aman xeli Seuwyo Sua saukuneebis sqolasti-
kis axal konteqstSi aRorZinebas da Tomizmi aqcia Tanamedrove filoso-
fiis erT-erT moqmed elementad. Jak mariteni (1882-1972), etien Jilsoni
(1884-1978), teier de Sarteni, karl raneri (1904-1984) da sxvebi iqcnen ka-
Tolikur da saero filosofias Soris did Suamavlebad.
1962 wels vatikanis II krebam dRevandeli msoflos umniSvnelovanes sa-
kiTxebze msjelobisas azrovnebis filosofiur-Teologiuri perspeqtive-
bis gafarToebisaken mouwoda. mniSvnelovani wvlili religiur filosofi-
aSi Seaqvs protestantul Teologias karl bartis (1886-1968), r. bultabe-
nis (1884-1934), paul tilixis (1886-1965) da sxvebis Sromebis meSveobiT. mar-
Tlmadidebluri tradiciebis niadagze warmoiSva XIX-XX saukuneebis rusu-
li religiur-filosofiuri skola (v. soloviovi, n. berdiaevi, l. Sestovi,
p. florenski, s. burgakovi, s. franki da sxv.).
kiTxva: ra aris religia? gadadis kiTxvaSi: rogori unda iyos religia?
religiuri filosofia gadadis religiur eTikaSi; religiuri filosofi-
95
is velidan gadavdivarT qristianuli eTikis velze: rogor unda moiqces

qristiani? garkveuli Tanxvedra RmerTis bunebriv da zebunebriv gamocx-
adebebs Soris yvelaze mkafiod swored eTikur TvalsawierSi unda gamov-
lindes. qristianuli eTika gvaswavlis ra aris moralurad swori da aras-
wori im adamainebisaTvis, vinc Tavisi rwmena daafuZna bibliur gamocxade-
baze da aRiarebs saeklesio krebebis mier miRebul mrwamss. unda gaimijnos
moralurobis qristianuli xedva moralis sxva koncefciebisagan da met-
naklebad cxadi saxiT dadgindes gadawyvetilebis miRebis swori orienti-
ri. rogori unda iyos religiuri adamianis mimarTeba kulturasTan unda
miiRos is? unda gaeqces mas? unda gardaqmnas is Tu kidev sxva pozicia unda
airCios? am sferoSi kvlevebs uwodeben kulturis Teologias. am dargSi
fuZemdeblurad iTvleba paul tilixis Sromebi.
rogori unda iyo religiuri adamianis mimarTeba politikur institu-
tebTan saxelmwifosTan? am sferos politikuri Teologia ewodeba. misi
fesvebi pavle mociqulTan da netar avgustinesTan aris saZiebeli. Tanamed-
rove politikuri filosofiis erT-erTi klasikosi leo Strausi aRniSnavs:
me ara var bibliuri Teologi, me var politikuri filosofosi, anu, mainte-
resebs politikuri institutebis dafuZnebis sakiTxi istoriaSi bunebrivi
gamocxadebis da bibliaSi zebunebrivi gamocxadebis mimarTebis velze.
rogor vlindeba zebunebrivi gamocxadeba mSvenierebaSi da adamianis
mxatvrul SemoqmedebaSi? am sferos Teologiuri esTetika uwodes. cno-
bili naSromebi am sferoSi ekuTvnis urs fon balTazars.
9. aris Tu ara filosofia saWiro religiisaTvis
zogierTi religiuri filosofosi Tvlis, rom religia aris Tavisuf-

lebisa da xsnis, sulis cxovnebis, maradiuli sicocxlis miRwevis erTader-
Ti gza, amitom mas ar sWirdeba filosofia, romelic gamocxadebamdel ka-
cobriobas, anu warmarTul kacobriobas sWirdeboda. xolo, mas Semdeg, rac
gamocxadeba aRsrulda, is aRar aris saWiro. n. berdiaevi SeniSnavs: reli-
gias SeuZlia iarsebos filosofiis gareSec, misi wyaroebi absoluturni da
TviTkmarni arian. xolo filosofias ar SeuZlia iarsebos religiis gareSe
religia sWirdeba mas, rogorc sazrdo, rogorc ukvdavebis wyaro.
yvela SesaZlo pasuxi kiTxvaze: saWiroa Tu ara religiisaTvis filo-
sofia? SeiZleba ramdenime variantamde daviyvanoT.
filosofia religias sWirdeba, rogorc damxmare saSualeba;
filosofia zemodan uyurebs religias, rwmena miaCnia codnis da-
bal safexurad da, amdenad, religiisaTvis is saSiSi partnioria;
filosofia religiurad dabneuli azrovnebis poziciaa. is merye-
obs RmerTis yofna-aryofnas Soris.
96
filosofia religiasTan mimarTebaSi gaorebulia. is im mojado-

ebul wreSia moqceuli, romelic netari avgustines formuliT
aris gamoxatuli: mwams, raTa gavigo, vigeb, raTa viwamo.
b. paskali ambobda: Tu yvelafers gonebas davuqvemdebarebT, Cveni re-
ligia darCeba zebunebrivisa da mistikuris gareSe, xolo, Tu yvelafers
rwmenas, guls davuqvemdebarebT, maSin es rwmena absurduli da ucnauri iq-
neba.
10. religiis filosofiis ori varianti
XIX saukunidan didi gansxvaveba dafiqsirda religiis filosofiis

or gansxvavebul variants, gansxvavebul models Tu tradicias Soris. maT
dRes aRniSnaven rogorc kontinentur-evropul da anglo-amerikul vari-
antebs. evropul-kontinenturi tradicia fokusirebulia religiur cda-
ze, mis Sinaarsze, ideaze, Rirebulebaze; religiis istoriuli da logiku-
ri sistematurobis gaxsnaze. am tradiciis didi fuZemdeblebi arian: i. kan-
ti, g.hegeli, f.Slaiermaxeri, r.oto da sxvebi. anglo-amerikul tradicias
sxvanairad lingvisturi analizis, an enis analizur filosofias uwodeben.
is religiuri enis analizzea fokusirebuli. am tradiciis gamoCenili war-
momadgenlebia: ludvig vitgenStaini, bertran raseli da sxvani.
anglo-amerikuli tipis filosofiis saxelmZRvaneloebi upiratesd
agebulia kritikuli azrovnebis saxelmZRvanelos qargaze. sagnis Seswavla
mimdinareobs kritikuli diskusiis formatSi. TiToeuli Tema Sedgeba ar-
gumentebisa da kontrargumentebisagan, ise, rom pozitiuri Tvalsazrisi
ar aris Camoyalibebuli. es iseTi diskusiaa, sadac ar arsebobs gamarjvebu-
li an damarcxebuli. Semswavleli eufleba kritikuli azrovnebis unar-Cve-
vebs, magram, es ar unda gaxdes religiuri indiferentizmis mizezi.
zogierTi saxelmZRvanelos avtori cdilobs religiis filosofia
sxvadasxva religiis skeptulaturi karkasis gadmocemaze daiyvanos, anu
religiis filosofia dauaxlovos religiis istorias. Tu amovalT im pozi-
ciidan, rom yvela religias Tavisi sakuTari filosofia aqvs, maSin mxedve-
lobidan unda gavuSvaT filosofia rogorc azrovnebis specifikuri wesi
da sruliad sxvadasxva mentalur matricebs davarqvaT filosofia.
mravlismetyvelia is faqti, rom religiur filosofias Tavisi warmo-
madgeneli hyavs Tanamedrove filosofiis yvela mimarTulebaSi. sxvadasxva
religiur-kulturuli tradiciebis warmomadgenlebi iaponelebi, Cine-
lebi, indusebi, arabebi, semitebi da sxvebi swavloben da Taviseburad iT-
viseben fenomenologias, eqsistencializms, personalizms, enis analizur
meTodebs. religiis filosofia xels unda uwyobdes religiuri WeSmari-
tebis ZiebaSi.
97
Tanamedrove religiis filosofiaSi erT-erT ZiriTad motivad iT-

vleba gonebis TviTSezRudvis tendencia, romelic adgils tovebs rwme-
nisaTvis. SeuZlebelia imis gamocnoba, momavalSi, gonebis TviTSezRudvis
tendencia miiRebs Tu ara TeologiasTan axali konvergenciis saxes, magram,
is ki cxadia, rom Secdomas uSveben, roca zedmet aqcents svamen filoso-
fiasa da Teologias Soris gansxvavebaze an msgavsebaze, an, roca xdeba maTi
aRreva, orives sazianod. Tumca, netari avgustinesa da kirkegoris ganazre-
bebSi Cven gviWirs bolomde gavmijnoT, sad Tavdeba filosofia da sad iwy-
eba Teologia.
dabolos unda iTqvas rogorc filosofiis, ise Teologiis pasuxis-
mgeblobis zrdaze Tanamedrove, postsekularul samyaroSi. sul ufro
aqtualuri xdeba maT Soris praqtikuli dialogi iseT sakiTxebze, rogo-
ricaa: omis saSinelebani, danaSaulobani adamianurobis winaaRmdeg, eko-
logiuri katastrofa, terorizmi, fundamentalizmi; bioeTikis sakiTxebi:
klonireba, evvTanazia, aborti, surogatuli dedoba, genoinJineria da teq-
nologiuri revoluciebis SedegebTan dakavSirebuli sakiTxebi, romlebic
gadaudeblad iTxoven gadawyvetas.
religiis filosofiis iseTi saxelmZRvanelos Seqmna, romelic reli-
giuri cxovrebis mecnieruli da Teologiuri monacemebis konceptualuri
interpretaciis saSualebas mogvcems, kvlav amocanad rCeba.
literatura:
1. nikolae dura, `sindisis Teologia~ da `sindisis filosofia~. `filo-

sofiur-Teologiuri mimomxilveli~, 1, 2011, Tbilisi
2. klimenti aleqsandrieli, stomata, wigni V, Tavi X, Targ. winasityvaoba da
SeniSvnebi ediSer WeliZisa, `gza sameufeo~, 1994, 2
3. Jones, D. Gardinal, J. Hoywarel, Philosophy of Religion, London, 2005
4. , , , 1991
5. imanuel kanti, wminda gonebis kritika, 1981 w. Tbilisi
6. rene dekarte, ganazrebani meTodis Sesaxeb, metafizikuri meditaciebi,
2010, Tbilisi
7. . (), . ,
, 2006
8. martin haidegeri, yofiereba da dro, Tbilisi, 1989
9. Jasques Derrida, La voix et La phenomena. Introduction au problem signe dans la
phenomenology de Husserrl. Paris, PUF, 1967
10. , , 1995
11. . , , -, 1993
98
IRAKLI BRACHULI
Three Paradigms of the Philosophy of Religion
summary
The article aims to discuss three main paradigms of the philosophy of religion: scho-
lastics, secular philosophy of religion and post secular philosophy of religion. Each of these
paradigms is analyzed as an essential element in the process of formation of the philosophy of
religion. Philosophy of religion always needs rethinking. The interrelation between religion and
philosophy has always been dynamic.
The religious politics in Europe is closely connected with the religion of philosophy. The
Edict of Milan (313 AD) is a fundamental document of European civilization and western cul-
ture. The idea of Europe is identical to the idea of the Enlightenment. This was expressed by
Kant in his well-known publication (Was ist Aufklarung?), whose essence may be opened in the
following: it is the autonomy of reason plus tolerance and freedom of conscience. Its slogan is:
I am Pagan in my reason and Christian in my heart (German Philosopher Jacob). According to
Kants conception, the Age of Reason - the Enlightenment is progress in the history of religion.
Old Religion is the religion of cult, and new religion is the religion of morality, not only
private liberty of conscience, but public presentation of a religious credo. This is the dilemma
of pluralism.
The Edict of Milan is a formulated presumption of westernization. The problem lies in the
interpretation of this presumption. In the tradition of western philosophy the principles of his-
torical hermeneutics were established. This was the alternative of empirical sciences (according
to Leibniz Matesis universalis). This methodological dualism was mentioned by Dilthey (his
terms were Naturvisenshaft and Geistvisenshaft ). Iurgen Habermas suggested the alternati-
ve of this dualism: the original theory of critical thinking. The basis of Empirico-Mathematical
sciences is practical interest. These sciences are constructed according to the technical-mathe-
matical epistemology; while the method of Humanities is Hermeneutics. Its object is spiritual
alliance, spiritual community. The interest of critical thinking is global communication. So, we
have three different sciences: Instrumental, Spiritual and Communicative. Habermas is the last
of the Mohicans of the Enlightenment. His critics mentioned that the result of Enlightenment
were: Holocaust, total control, and micro and macro nets of power (Michel Foucault) and
post humanistic perspective in the 21st century. The opponents of Habermas refer to the work
of Edmund Huserls Crisis of European Science and Transcendental Phenomenology. Huserl
announced the general principle of European thinking: permanent critical self-reflection. Its aim
is: the description of transformations of tolerance/ the idea of Europe /social contract.
Will the coexistence of Modernity and counter-modernity/Anti-globalism be possible?
Futurological perspective: Will the project of the Enlightenment collapse? Politics of religious
liberty was a precedent, and not a historical tradition.
99
Christian Caesar, Christian Emperor is a paradox. The Kingdom of Caesar and the
Kingdom of Christ are not identical. The Emperor of Byzantium, Konstantin changed the prin-
ciples of the Edict of Milan. Governments get a sanction from Christ. One God! One Caesar!
One religion! Tolerance is not a system, it is a method. Religion is not a political project. The
instruments of their harmonization and distancing are education, media and church. They are
three pillars: episteme, representation and ethics.
The aim of philosophy of religion is the philosophical examination of the central themes
and concepts involved in religious traditions. It involves all the main areas of philosophy: me-
taphysics, epistemology, logic, ethics and value theory, the philosophy of language, philosophy
of science, law, sociology, politics, history and so on. It also includes an investigation into the
religious significance of historical events. Is the essence of religion rational or irrational?
In the period when Monotheistic biblical religions were established, a context of the term
theology was defined and was clearly set apart from philosophy.
Theologos, closely related to theologia, appears in some biblical manuscripts, in the
heading to the book of Revelation: apokalypsis ioannoy toy theologoy, which means wisdom of
Hellenes. In order to systematically differentiate the spheres of theology and philosophy, two
metaphors were put forward: Athina and Jerusalem. Athina became a symbol of philosop-
hical thinking, and Jerusalem of religious revelation. A theologian is a person who practices,
experiences and writes by Gods inspiration and who expresses His will. Since II-III centuries a
theologian has been called a person who makes comments on the Bible with the help of philo-
sophy, who exegetes the Bible. A theologian is an exegeter. One of the aims of theology is the
apologetics of religion, defending the Bible from wrong comments, heresy and pagan opponents.
At that time philosophy was defined as pre-theology, a preparatory stage for theology. Later
was born scholasticism as a union of religion and philosophy. Scholastic thought is also known
for rigorous conceptual analysis and careful drawing of distinctions. Because of its emphasis on
rigorous dialectical method, scholasticism was eventually applied to many other fields of study.
Scholasticism is the first paradigm of philosophy of religion, a pre-paradigm.
Gradually philosophy of religion passes from the Enlightenment phase to the post secular
paradigm. It chooses the strategy of re-actualization (renovation) of religious valence of Univer-
se, which is accomplished by the deconstruction of Enlightenments ideal. After Schleiermacher
religious experience happens to be in the center of interest. From Leibniz, Lessing, Fichte, Jaco-
bi and the Romantic school, Schleiermacher had imbibed a profound and mystical view of the
inner depths of human personality. His religious thought found its expression most notably in
The Christian Faith, one of the most influential works of Christian theology of its time.
The ego, the person, is an individualization of universal reason; and the primary act of
self-consciousness is the first conjunction of universal and individual life, the immediate union
or marriage of the universe with incarnated reason. Thus, every person becomes a specific and
original representation of the universe and a compendium of humanity, a microcosm in which
the world is immediately reflected. While therefore we cannot, as we have seen, attain the idea of
the supreme unity of thought and being by either cognition or volition, we can find it in our own
personality, in immediate self-consciousness or (which is the same in Schleiermachers termino-
100
logy) feeling. Feeling in this higher sense (as distinguished from organic sensibility, Empfin-
dung), which is the minimum of distinct antithetic consciousness, the cessation of the antithesis
of subject and object, constitutes likewise the unity of our being, in which the opposite functions
of cognition and volition have their fundamental and permanent background of personality and
their transitional link. Religion lies at the basis of all thought and action, as it has its seat in this
central point of our being, or indeed consists in the essential fact of self-consciousness.
Dissemination of Husserls phenomenological method causes moving philosophy of re-
ligion into phenomenology of religion. Its aim is to reveal and extend immanent values of reli-
gious experience.
101
Teologia
THEOLOGY
mama aleqsi (qSutaSvili)
zeTis kurTxevis saidumlosTan dakavSirebuli zogierTi

kanonikur-liturgikuli sakiTxi
zeTis kurTxeva aris saidumlo, romlis drosac zeTis cxebisas, avad-

myofisTvis moixmoba sulieri da xorcieli uZlurebis ganmkurnebeli
RvTis madli.1
iseve, rogorc yvela saeklesio saidumlos SemTxvevaSi, zeTis kurTxe-
vis daweseba ukavSirdeba uSualod macxovar ieso qristes da wminda mociqu-
lebs. wminda werilSi avadmyofis zeTiT da RviniT cxebis Taobaze lapara-
kia mowyale samaritelis igavSi: `samariteli vinme warvidoda, movida masve
adgilsa, ixila igi da Seiwyala. da movida misa da Seuxvia wyluli igi da da-
asxa zeTi da Rvino~2 (luka 10:33-34). saxarebaSi naTqvamia, rom, rodesac ieso
qristem pirvelad gaagzavna mociqulebi saqadageblad, isini `gamovides da
qadagebdes, raiTa Seinanon. da eSmakni mravalni ganasxnes da scxebdes zeTsa
mravalTa sneulTa da ganhkurnebdes~3 (markoz 6: 12-13); magram, zeTis kur-
Txevis dawesebasTan dakavSirebiT, yvelaze cxad mowmobas vpoulobT wminda
mociqul iakobis kaTolike epistoleSi: ùZlur Tu vinme ars Tquen Soris,
mouwoden xucesTa eklesiisaTa da ilocon mis zeda da scxon mas zeTi sa-
xeliTa uflisaiTa. da locvaman sarwmunoebisaman acxovnos sneuli igi da
aRadginos igi ufalman. daRacaTu codvai raime eqmnes, move-eteos mas~4 (ia-
kob 5: 14-15).
amasTan erTad, zeTis kurTxeva, albaT, erTaderTi saidumloa, rom-
lis SesrulebasTan dakavSirebiT, marTlmadidebel eklesiaSi ar arsebobs
1
wminda mRvdelmTavari filareti (drozdovi), vrceli marTlmadidebluri ka-
texizmo, Tbilisi 2010, gv. 113.
2
axali aRTqumai uflisa Cuenisa ieso qristesi, daibeWda uwmindesisa da une-
taresis, sruliad saqarTvelos kaTolikos-patriarqis ilia II brZanebiTa da
locva-kurTxeviT, saqarTvelos sapatriarqos gamomcemloba, Tbilisi 1995,
gv. 132.
3
axali aRTqumai uflisa Cuenisa ieso qristesi, gv. 76.
4
iqve, gv. 290.
102
mama aleqsi (qSutaSvili) _ zeTis kurTxevis saidumlosTan dakavSirebuli
zogierTi kanonikur-liturgikuli sakiTxi
erTiani wesi. liturgikul-kanonikuri tradiciebi xSirad gansxvavdeba ara

mxolod sxvadasxva avtokefalur eklesiebs Soris, aramed gansxvavebebs,
aseve, vpoulobT erTsa da imave adgilobrivi eklesiis sazRvrebSic. winam-
debare statiaSi Cveni mizania, aRvniSnoT ramdenime kanonikuri da litur-
gikuli problematuri aspeqti am saidumlos SesrulebasTan dakavSirebiT.
1. materia
zeTis kurTxevis saidumlos SesrulebisTvis saWiro ZiriTad mate-

riad gamoiyeneba zeTi. aRsaniSnavia, rom xmelTaSua zRvis auzis qveynebSi,
am saidumlos aRsrulebisas, eqskluziurad gamoiyeneba mxolod zeiTunis
zeTi. mizezad, upirveles yovlisa, saxeldeba is faqti, rom macxovari ieso
qriste da mociqulebi avadmyofebis cxebisas iyenebdnen mxolod zeiTunis
zeTs. es gasagebicaa, radgan sxva mcenarisgan damzadebuli zeTi, praqtiku-
lad, arc moipoveba siria-palestinis geografiul zonaSi. meore rigSi, mi-
zezad saxeldeba zeiTunis zeTis sufTa samkurnalo Tvisebebi.
sxva qveynebSi, sadac zeTisxilis xe ar izrdeba da, Sesabamisad, am mce-
narisgan damzadebuli zeTi did iSviaTobas warmoadgens, zeTis kurTxevis
saidumlos SesrulebisTvis, rogorc wesi, gamoiyeneba mzesumziris zeTi.
ra Tqma unda, Secdoma iqneboda gvefiqra, rom saidumlos Zala da madli da-
mokidebulia im mcenareze, romlisganac mzaddeba zeTi. miuxedavad imisa,
rom zeTis warmoSobasTan dakavSirebuli liturgikuli tradiciebi sxva-
dasxva adgilobriv eklesiebSi gansxvavdeba, dogmaturi swavlebis mixed-
viT, saidumlos moqmedeba damokidebulia marTlmadidebeli eklesiis ka-
nonikuri sasuliero pirebis (episkoposebis, mRvdlebis) locvaze, suliw-
mindis gardamosvlaze da, ra Tqma unda, mimReblebis rwmenaze. Sesabamisad,
ar arsebobs aranairi dogmaturi, kanonikuri an liturgikuli Secdoma im
SemTxvevaSi, roca zeTis kurTxevis saidumlos SesrulebisTvis gamoiyeneba
zeiTunis, mzesumziris, Tu sxva romelime mcenarisgan damzadebuli zeTi
simindis, brinjis an nigvzis.
zeTis kurTxevis saidumloSi gamoyenebul materiasTan dakavSirebiT
erTi Taviseburebac arsebobs: kerZod, saqarTvelos da ruseTis marTlma-
didebel eklesiebSi zeTi, daaxloebT 50/50 procentiT, zavdeba wiTeli Rvi-
niT. dReisTvis praqtikaSi gamoyenebul rusul da qarTul kurTxevanebSi
vkiTxulobT: `SeiswavleT, rameTu didsa eklesiasa Sina wylisa wil Rvinosa
Staasxmen kandelsa zeTis sakurTxevlad...~.5 Tanamedrove qarTuli kurTxe-
5
mcire kurTxevani, daibeWda uwmindesisa da unetaresis, sruliad saqarTvelos
kaTolikos-patriarqis ilia II-is locva-kurTxeviT, Tbilisi, 1998, gv. 104.
gamokrebuli kurTxevani, daibeWda vanisa da baRdaTis episkopos antonis loc-
va-kurTxeviT, Tbilisi, 2009. gv. 98.
, , , 1911, 69.
103
vani XIX saukuneSi Sesrulebul rusuli kurTxevanis Targmans warmoadgens.

moyvanili citatidan Cans, rom warsulSi ruseTSi zeTSi wylis Serevis li-
turgikuli tradiciac arsebobda, rac Semdgom Seicvala da wylis magier
adgili sabolood Rvinom daikava, rogorc sakurTxi materiis meore auci-
lebelma komponentma.
aseTi liturgikuli tradicia, pirvel rigSi, efuZneba mowyale sama-
ritelis igavs, sadac naTqvamia, rom daWrili mgzavris wylulebze samari-
telma daasxa Rvino da zeTi. amavdroulad, kargadaa cnobili, rom Rvino da
zeTi, maTi religiur-simboluri mniSvnelobebidan gamomdinare, jer kidev
Zveli aRTqmis periodidan dRemde, gamoiyeneba sxvadasxva saeklesio wesebsa
da saidumloebebSi.6 aseve, istoriuli wyaroebidan cnobilia, rom Rvino da
zeTi, maTi antiseptikuri da samkurnalo Tvisebebis gamo, jer kidev antiku-
ri xanidan dRemde, sxvadasxva formiT, farTod gamoiyeneba medicinaSi.7
aqve aRsaniSnavia, rom wminda giorgi mTawmindelis kurTxevanSi (me-XI
sk.) zeTis kurTxevis saidumloSi sakurTx masalad naxsenebia mxolod zeTi,
romelic isxmeboda kandelSi da danTebul kandelSive ikurTxeboda.8
maSasadame, zeTis kurTxevis saidumlos SesrulebisTvis ZiriTad au-
cilebel masalas (materias) warmoadgens zeiTunis, mzesumziris, an nebismi-
eri sxva mcenaris zeTi, romelsac SeiZleba daematos wiTeli Rvinoc.
2. Semsrulebeli
zeTis kurTxevis saidumlos SesrulebasTan dakavSirebuli sxvadasxva

liturgikul-kanonikuri tradicia gvxdeba Semsrulebel mRvdlebis ricx-
vTan dakavSirebiTac. zogadi wesis mixedviT, es saidumlo unda Sesruldes
Svidi mRvdlis mier: `mouwodon SvidTa mRvdelTa~9 naTqvamia wminda giorgi
mTawmindelis did kurTxevanSi, amitom zeTis kurTxevis msaxureba moicavs
Svid samociqulo da saxarebis monakveTs, zeTis kurTxevis da avadmyofis
gankurnebis Txovnis Svid sxvadasxva locvas, igulisxmeba, TiTo TiToe-
uli mRvdlisTvis. amitom am saidumlos berZnulad aseve `Svidi mRvdlis
saidumlo~ () hqvia, rusebi am saidumlos eZaxian , anu
6
Preot Asist. Dr. Silviu Tudose, Taina Sfantului Maslu Istoric, Randuiala si Semnificatie, in Taina
Sfantului Maslu. Indrumator Teologic, Liturgic si Pastoral, Ed. Cuvantul Vietii, Bucuresti, 2012,
p. 20-21.
7
dawyebuli XI-XII saukuneebidan, medicinaSi Rvinis magier nawilobriv daiwyes
spirtis gamoyeneba, magram Rvinos mainc ar daukargavs Tavisi gansakuTrebuli
adgili.
8
didi kurTxevani, gamosacemad moamzada, gamokvlevebi da sqolioebi daurTo
ediSer WeliZem, Tbilisi, 2002, gv. 340.
9
iqve, gv. 340.
104
msaxureba, romelic mRvdelTa krebis mier tardeba,10 saqarTveloSi ki am

msaxurebas veZaxiT `Svid zeTis cxebas, anu TiToeuli mRvdeli TiTojer
scxebda avadmyofs da aseTnairad sruldeboda Svidi cxeba.
iqidan gamomdinare, rom praqtikaSi yovelTvis araa SesaZlebeli Svi-
di mRvdlis erTad Sekreba, amitom bunebrivad dawesda, rom am saidumlos
Sesruleba SeuZlia Svidze nakleb, anu xuT, sam an or mRvdelsac.11 sakamaTo
problema dgeba maSin, rodesac ismeva kiTxva: SeuZlia Tu ara erT mRvdels
zeTis kurTxevis saidumlos Sesruleba? saqarTvelos, ruseTis da antioqi-
is marTlmadidebel eklesiebSi ar arsebobs aranairi kanonikuri an tipiko-
naluri akrZalva am saidumlos erTi mRvdlis mier SesrulebasTan dakavSi-
rebiT.12 Sesabamisad, am adgilobriv avtokefaliur eklesiebSi zeTis kur-
Txevis saidumlos Sesruleba erTi mRvdlis mier aris Cveulebrivi movlena,
xolo, ramdenime, ukeTes SemTxvevaSi, Svidi mRvdlis Sekreba miCneulia sa-
survelad praqtikuli mizezebidan gamomdinare, radgan es saidumlo sakma-
od xangrZlivia da, Sesabamisad, damRleli erTi sasuliero pirisTvis.
sainteresoa, rom rumineTis da eladis (saberZneTis) marTlmadidebel
eklesiebSi zeTis kurTxevis saidumlos Sesruleba erTi mRvdlis mier iT-
vleba mZime kanonikur darRvevad, ris gamoc Semsrulebel sasuliero pirs
SeiZleba mieces SeniSvna, an mkacri kanonikuri sasjelic ki.13 aseTi litur-
gikuli praqtika efuZneba wminda werilis erTaderT citatas, romlis Ta-
obazec wers wminda svimeon Tesalonikeli: `zeTis kurTxeva ar unda Ses-
ruldes erTi mRvdlis mier. rogorc episkoposzecaa naTqvami, rom ar unda
daesxas xeli erTi mRvdelmTavris mier, aseve zeTis kurTxevac ar unda Ca-
tardes erTi mRvdlis mier, radgan mravlobiT ricxvSi wers [wminda mociqu-
li iakobi]: mouwoden xucesTa eklesiisaTa da ilocon mis zeda da scxon mas
zeTi saxeliTa uflisaiTa.14
Tumca, Tavad rumineli mecnieri liturgistebi da kanonistebi, rogo-
rebicaa, magaliTad, mRvdeli ene braniSte da mRvdelmonazoni nikodim sa-
10
Preot Prof. Dr. Ene Braniste, Liturgica Speciala, Editura Nemira, Bucuresti, 2002, p. 329.
11
Floca Ioan N. Arhidiacon Prof. Dr., DREPT CANONIC ORTODOX, Legislaie si Administraie
Bisericeasc, vol. II, Editura Institutului Biblic i de Misiune al Bisericii Ortodoxe Romane,
Bucuresti, 1990, p.40.
12
Preot Prof. Dr. Ene Braniste, Liturgica Speciala, p. 330.
13
Preot Prof. Dr. Ene Braniste, Liturgica Speciala, p. 330;
Floca Ioan N. Arhidiacon Prof. Dr., DREPT CANONIC ORTODOX, vol. II, p. 40.
Preot Prof. Dr. Nicolae D. Necula, Practici Necanonice si Neliturgice Legate de Savarsirea Tainei
Sfantului Maslu, in Taina Sfantului Maslu. Indrumator Teologic, Liturgic si Pastoral, Ed. Cuvan-
tul Vietii, Bucuresti, 2012, p. 36-37.
14
Sf. Simeon al Tesalonicului, Tractat asupra tuturor dogmelor crestine ortodoxe, trad. De Toma
Teodorescu, Bucuresti, 1865, cap. 283, p. 184;
Sachelarie Nicodim Ieromonah, Pravila Bisericeasca, Editie a III-a, Editata de Parohia Valea Plop-
ului Jud. Prahova, 1999, p. 324.
105
kelarie, aRniSnaven: `miviCnevT, rom saWiroebis SemTxvevaSi, ar iqneba Sec-

doma, Tu zeTis kurTxeva Catardeba erTi mRvdlis mier, radgan mociqulebi
da wminda mamebi martoc loculobdnen da xalxs kurnavdnen... es problema
rom mniSvnelovani yofiliyo, aucileblad dafiqsirdeboda saeklesio ka-
nonebSi. xolo, radgan kanonebSi araferia naTqvami amis Taobaze, es imas am-
tkicebs, rom sasurvelia zeTis kurTxeva Catardes ramdenime mRvdlis mier,
magram, saWiroebis SemTxvevaSi, erT mRvdelsac SeuZlia.15 aseve arqidiako-
ni ioan n. floka wers: ìm wess, rom erT mRvdels ar SeuZlia zeTis kurTxevis
Catareba, ra Tqma unda, ar aqvs aranairi dogmaturi safuZveli, aramed, mxo-
lod ceremonialuri. radgan ar arsebobs iseTi saeklesio swavleba, romlis
mixedviTac mRvdels xeldasxmiT ar eZleodes madlis sisavse, rom martom
Seasrulos Svididan eqvsi saidumlo da aucileblad Wirdebodes sxva ram-
denime mRvdlis madlis damateba, rom zeTis kurTxevis saidumlos mieces
Sesabamisi Zala da madli~.16
maSasadame, sasuliero pirebis saWiro raodenobasTan dakavSirebuli
sakiTxi damokidebulia TiToeuli adgilobrivi avtokefaliuri eklesiis
liturgikul tradiciaze, romelic xangrZlivi praqtikidan gamomdinare
iZens kanonis Zalas da mkacrad unda iqnes gaTvaliswinebuli.
3. mimRebi
zeTis kurTxevis saidumlos mimRebni arian monaTluli marTlmadide-

beli qristianebi. Tumca, aqac Cndeba xolme gaurkveveli situaciebi, rom-
lebic aseve iTxoven swor da adekvatur pasuxebs:
a) amboben, rom zeTis kurTxevis saidumlos miRebamde aucilebelia,
morwmunes hqondes naTqvami aRsareba da iyos naziarebi qristes sisxlsa da
xorcs. profesori ene braniSte wers, rom `maSin, rodesac es saidumlo tar-
deba avadmyofis saxlSi, morwmunem jer unda Tqvas aRsareba da Semdeg ezia-
ros~, Tumca iqve aRniSnavs, rom `dogmaturi swavlebis mixedviT, zeTis kur-
Txevis saidumlos moqmedeba ar aris damokidebuli sinanulis saidumlos
Sesrulebaze~.17 magram praqtikaSi yovelTvis ver xerxdeba, rom mimRebs wi-
naswar hqondes aRsareba naTqvami da iyos naziarebi, gansakuTrebiT maSin,
rodesac zeTis kurTxeva tardeba taZarSi sajarod, an rodesac avadmyofi
imyofeba komaSi. zogadad, unda vicodeT, am saidumlos miRebisTvis, auci-
lebelia morwmunis Sesabamisi sulieri momzadeba, rac, ukeTes SemTxvevaSi,
gulisxmobs aRsarebis Tqmas da ziarebas. magram, gamonaklis SemTxvevebSi,
sul mcire, aucilebelia, rom mimRebi iyos, zogadad, aqtiuri eklesiuri
15
Sachelarie Nicodim Ieromonah, Pravila Bisericeasca, p. 324.
16
17
Braniste Ene Preot Prof. Dr., Liturgica Speciala, p. 329, 330.
106
marTlmadidebeli qristiani, romelic acnobierebs Svidi zeTis cxebis sa-

idumlos mniSvnelobasa da Sinaarss da uaxlovdeba am saidumlos Sesabamisi
rwmeniTa da sasoebiT. komaSi myofi adamianis SemTxvevaSi, romelic saerTod
ar cxovrobs religiurad da ar SeuZlia daadasturos, rom swams RmerTi, ar
SeuZlia aRiaros sakuTari Tavi codvilad da gamoxatos survili, rom mii-
Ros es saidumlo, zeTis cxebis Catareba ar aris swori.
b) saqarTvelos eklesiaSi, zogan gaismis mosazreba, rom, Tu adamianma
axlo warsulSi ukve icxo nakurTxi zeTi, misTvis an aRar SeiZleba, an aRar
aris mizanSewonili zeTis kurTxevis saidumlos xelaxla miReba. aseTi mo-
sazreba, ra Tqma unda, ar Seesabameba marTlmadidebeli eklesiis dogmatur
-kanonikur swavlebas, radgan cnobilia, rom zeTis kurTxeva, iseve, rogorc
evqaristia, iseTi saidumloebebia, romelTa miRebis sixSirezec ar arsebobs
aranairi SezRudva, Tu, ra Tqma unda, adamians ar aqvs dadebuli Sesabamisi
epitemia.18 sasuliero pirebi, romlebic ar aZleven uflebas qristianebs,
xelaxla daeswron Svid zeTis cxebas, amas akeTeben drois ekonomiis miz-
niT, radgan did marxvaSi, sajaro zeTis kurTxevebze, Zalze didi raodeno-
bis xalxi modis da Tu taZarSi ar msaxurobs sakmarisi raodenobis mRvdeli,
damRleli xdeba yvela morwmunis saTiTaod Svidjer cxeba.
g) arsebobs SemTxvevebi, rodesac ambionebidan aswavlian, TiTqosda,
Svid wlamde asakis bavSvebisTvis am saidumlos miReba ar SeiZleba, radgan
maT ar aqvT codvebi. aseTi mosazreba SeiZleba Segvxvdes zogierT Zvel
saeklesio wignSic, rogoricaa, magaliTad, rumineTis qalaq buzeuSi 1702
wels gamoqveynebuli wigni mokle swavlebani mRvdelTaTvis.19
patara bavSvebis ardaSveba Svid zeTis cxebaze didi Secdomaa, radgan
mcdaria argumenti, romlis safuZvelzec cdiloben daasabuTon es mosaz-
reba. codvebis SendobisTvis dawesebuli specialuri saidumlo aris sina-
nulis saidumlo da mcirewlovani bavSvebi, ra Tqma unda, ar monawileoben
am saidumloSi, radgan maT jer ar miaRwies Sesabamis gonebriv da zneobriv
simwifes, rom gaacnobieron TavianTi qmedebebi. xolo, zeTis kurTxevis sai-
dumlos dawesebis mizani aris sulieri da xorcieli avadmyofobebisgan gan-
kurneba. wminda mociquli iakobi gasagebad wers: ùZlur Tu vinme ars Tquen
Soris, mouwoden xucesTa eklesiisaTa da ilocon mis zeda da scxon mas ze-
Ti saxeliTa uflisaiTa. da locvaman sarwmunoebisaman acxovnos sneuli igi
da aRadginos igi ufalman~ (iakobi 5: 14-15). anu naTqvamia - ùZlur Tu vinme
ars Tquen Soris~ da ara `codvil Tu vinme ars Tquen Soris!~ amitom, XX sa-
ukunis erT-erTi udidesi profesori dogmatikaSi, mRvdeli dumitru sta-
niloae, zeTis kurTxevis saidumlos daniSnulebasTan dakavSirebiT, werda:
18
19
Braniste Ene Preot Prof. Dr., Liturgica Speciala, p. 329.
107
ès saidumlo, gansakuTrebulad, SeiZleba CaiTvalos sxeulis saidumlod,

anu saidumlod, romelic dawesebulia sxeulis gamosajanmrTeleblad~.20
wminda mociquli iakobis epistolis moyvanili citatidan yuradsaRe-
bia is faqtic, rom arsad araa naxsenebi avadmyofis asakobrivi cenzi, rom-
lebisTvisac iqneba daSvebuli an akrZaluli sasuliero pirebis moxmoba da
zeTis kurTxevis saidumlos Catareba. maSasadame, Tu romelime mcirewlo-
vani monaTluli bavSvi avad gaxdeba, zeTis kurTxevis saidumlos Sesruleba
misTvis ara mxolod dasaSvebia, aramed nabrZanebicaa wminda werilis mier.
rac Seexeba zeTis kurTxevis saidumlos dros codvebis Sendobas, aR-
saniSnavia, rom mRvdeli dumitru staniloae ganixilavs amas, rogorc meo-
rad Sedegs.21 amitom, zeTis kurTxevis saidumlos pirdapir codvebis mite-
vebasTan dakavSireba absoluturad usafuZvloa.
Cven Tu dasabuTebulad miviRebT im mosazrebas, romlis mixedviTac
Svid wlamde bavSvebisTvis Svidi zeTis cxeba ar SeiZleba, radgan maT pira-
di codvebi ar aqvT, aseTi logikiT mcirewlovani bavSvebisTvis evqaristiis
saidumlos miRebac unda iyos akrZaluli, radgan, rogorc naTqvamia ziare-
bis wina locvebSi, qristes sisxls da xorcs Cven veziarebiT `misatevebelad
codvaTa da cxovrebad saukunod~.22
maSasadame, mcirewlovani bavSvebis Svid zeTis cxebaze ardaSvebas ar
gaaCnia aranairi saxarebiseuli, dogmaturi an sxva raime xasiaTis safuZve-
li da, Sesabamisad, unda CaiTvalos did Secdomad, Tu msgavsi ram Segvxdeba
romelime taZris praqtikaSi.
winamdebare statiaSi Cven SevexeT mxolod ramdenime problemur sa-
kiTxs zeTis kurTxevis saidumlosTan dakavSirebiT, rac miznad isaxavs zo-
gadad specialistebis mier ganxilvebis wamowyebas, rom am saidumlos Cata-
rebis praqtikaSi arsebobdes erTiani wesi.
20
Stniloae Dumitru Preot Prof. Dr., Teologia Dogmatic Ortodox, vol. 3, Editura Institutului Bib-
lic i de Misiune al Bisericii Ortodoxe Romne, Bucureti, 1997, p. 136.
21
Stniloae Dumitru Preot Prof. Dr., Teologia Dogmatic Ortodox, vol. 3, p. 137.
22
samRvdelo kondaki, daibeWda uwmindesisa da unetaresis, sruliad saqarT-
velos kaTolikos-patriarqis ilia II-is locva-kurTxeviT, Tbilisi, 2007, gv.
190.
108
literatura:
1. axali aRTqumai uflisa Cuenisa ieso qristesi, daibeWda uwmindesisa da

unetaresis, sruliad saqarTvelos kaTolikos-patriarqis ilia II brZanebiTa
da locva-kurTxeviT, saqarTvelos sapatriarqos gamomcemloba, Tbilisi
1995.
2. didi kurTxevani, gamosacemad moamzada, gamokvlevebi da sqolioebi daurTo
ediSer WeliZem, Tbilisi, 2002.
3. mcire kurTxevani, daibeWda uwmindesisa da unetaresis, sruliad
saqarTvelos kaTolikos-patriarqis ilia II-is locva-kurTxeviT, Tbilisi,
1998.
4. gamokrebuli kurTxevani, daibeWda vanisa da baRdaTis episkopos antonis
locva-kurTxeviT, Tbilisi, 2009.
5. samRvdelo kondaki, daibeWda uwmindesisa da unetaresis, sruliad
saqarTvelos kaTolikos-patriarqis ilia II-is locva-kurTxeviT, Tbilisi,
2007.
6. wminda mRvdelmTavari filareti (drozdovi), vrceli marTlmadidebluri
katexizmo, Tbilisi 2010.
7. , , , 1911, 69.
8. Sf. Simeon al Tesalonicului, Tractat asupra tuturor dogmelor crestine ortodoxe, trad. De Toma
Teodorescu, Bucuresti, 1865.
9. Preot Asist. Dr. Silviu Tudose, Taina Sfantului Maslu Istoric, Randuiala si Semnificatie,
in Taina Sfantului Maslu. Indrumator Teologic, Liturgic si Pastoral, Ed. Cuvantul Vietii,
Bucuresti, 2012.
10. Preot Prof. Dr. Ene Braniste, Liturgica Speciala, Editura Nemira, Bucuresti, 2002.
11. Floca Ioan N. Arhidiacon Prof. Dr., DREPT CANONIC ORTODOX, Legislaie si
Administraie Bisericeasc, vol. II, Editura Institutului Biblic i de Misiune al Bisericii
Ortodoxe Romane, Bucuresti, 1990.
12. Preot Prof. Dr. Nicolae D. Necula, Practici Necanonice si Neliturgice Legate de Savarsirea
Tainei Sfantului Maslu, in Taina Sfantului Maslu. Indrumator Teologic, Liturgic si Pastoral,
Ed. Cuvantul Vietii, Bucuresti, 2012.
13. Sachelarie Nicodim Ieromonah, Pravila Bisericeasca, Editie a III-a, Editata de Parohia Valea
Plopului Jud. Prahova, 1999.
14. Stniloae Dumitru Preot Prof. Dr., Teologia Dogmatic Ortodox, vol. 3, Editura Institutului
Biblic i de Misiune al Bisericii Ortodoxe Romne, Bucureti, 1997.
109
PRIEST ALEXI (KSHUTASHVILI)
Some of the Canonical-Liturgical Issues Connected with the Mystery

of Holy Unction
summary
The Mystery of Holy Unction is the Ecclesiastical Sacrament throughout which the Ano-
inting of the sick person with the Consecrated Oil is called the Divine Mercy that heals from
spiritual and somatic illnesses.
The establishment of all the Ecclesiastical Sacraments, the foundation of the Mystery of
Holy Unction among them, is connected with Christ and the Holy Apostles. The most obvious
evidence related to the establishment of the Sacrament can be found in the Book of James: 14.
Is anyone among you ill? Let him send for the rulers of the church; and let them say prayers over
him, putting oil on him in the name of the Lord. 15. And by the prayer of faith the man who is ill
will be made well, and he will be lifted up by the Lord, and for any sin which he has done he will
have forgiveness. (James. 5:14-15).
Furthermore, the Mystery of Holy Unction is probably the only Sacrament in the Ortho-
dox Church, which does not have a general order of the celebration, which is required for the
whole Church. In the presented paper, our aim is to discuss some of the Canonical and Liturgical
problems and the aspects connected with the celebration of the Mystery of Holy Unction.
1. The Substance
The main substance requested for the celebration of the Mystery of Holy Unction is oil.
We have to mention that in the Mediterranean countries, only olive-oil is used for the Consec-
ration. In those countries where olive-trees are not planted and, consequently, olive-oil is a real
rarity; so, for the Consecration of the Holy Oil, sunflower oil is used instead.
There is one particular tradition related to the substance used in the Mystery of Holy
Unction: in the Orthodox Churches of Georgia and Russia, the oil has to be mixed with red wi-
ne. In the other Autocephalous Churches such tradition is not in practice.
2. The Performer
We have different Liturgical-Canonical traditions related to the amount of the performer

priests in the Celebration of the Holy Unction Sacrament. According to the general order, this
Sacrament has to be performed by seven priests.
Since in practice it is not always possible to bring together seven priests, it was naturally
established that the celebration of this Sacrament may be performed by five, three or even two
110
priests. The problem arises with the following question: Can one priest alone perform the Celeb-
ration of the Holy Unction Sacrament? In the Orthodox Churches of Georgia, Russia and Anti-
och, there is no canonical, or liturgical prohibition related to the celebration of the Holy Unction
by one priest alone. It should be noted that in the Orthodox Churches of Romania and Greece the
performing of the Sacrament of Holy Unction by one priest alone is a serious canonical outrage
and the performer priest can be reproved or severely punished.
3. The Recipient
The recipients of the Mystery of Holy Unction are baptized Orthodox Christians. But,
there are some obscure situations which require sufficient answers: there are occasions, when
some priests teach that Anointing of children under seven is prohibited, because they have not
committed sins yet.
Such prohibition is a great mistake as the above-mentioned argument is not correct. A par-
ticular Mystery established for forgiving sins is the Mystery of Penance and, of course, children
do not participate in it, because they have not reached the sufficient mental and moral maturity
yet, to be able to analyze their own behaviour. Unlike the Mystery of Penance, the reason of
establishment of the Mystery of Holy Unction is not the forgiving of sins, but the healing from
spiritual and somatic illnesses.
Consequently, the prohibition of Anointing of Children has no Evangelical, Dogmatic or
any kind of Theological basis and should be considered as canonical outrage.
111
griver farulava
qarTuli ena, literatura da sarwmunoeba, miwa-wyali da

qarTveli1
. enis fenomeni organulad ukavSirdeba eris arss, raobas. amis kvalo-

baze ambobda ilia WavWavaZe: àrsebiTi niSani erovnebisa, misi guli da suli
enaao~. TiToeuli ena, iseve rogorc qarTuli, amJRavnebs tvifars mraval-
saukunovani kulturuli Semoqmedebisa. rodesac enas ganixilaven mxolod
im TvalsazrisiT, rom igi urTierTobis saSualebaa, rogoradac safuZvli-
ani ar unda iyos aseTi Zieba, uyuradRebod rCeba enis suli, daviwyebulia,
rom ena faseulia TavisTavad, Tavis SigniT, viTarca mizani, eris, xalxis az-
risa da msoflSegrZnebis iaraRi.
moZRvrebas imis Sesaxeb, rom ena sulismieri Zala da energiaa, safuZ-
vels mecxramete saukunis ociani wlebidan uyris didi germaneli moazrov-
ne vilhelm humboldti. 1836 w. berlinSi qveyndeba misi traqtati adamianu-
ri enis aRnagobis sxvadasxvaobisa da adamianTa modgmis sulier ganviTare-
baSi misi gavlenis Sesaxeb: ìm droidan dRevandlamde, saukuneze meti xnis
Semdgom ityvis martin haidegeri am wignis Sesaxeb: es traqtati akvalianebs
mTels Semdegdroindel lingvistikas da enis filosofias~. berZnuli an-
tikurobidanve moyolebuli da sxvadasxva mxares orientirebuli enaTmec-
nieruli mimarTulebani `Tavis mwvervals aRweven vilhelm humboldtis sa-
enaTmecniero TvalTaxedvaSi~ (m. haidegeri, `gza enisaken~).
humboldtis erT-erT naSroms ase hqvia `xasiaTi enisa da xasiaTi xal-
xisa~. aq vkiTxulobT: ènaSi Cven yovelTvis vpoulobT odindeli enobrivi
xasiaTis Senadnobs imasTan, rac enas moucia nacionaluri xasiaTisagan~.
meore mxriv, ènis Tavisebureba gavlenas axdens eris arsze~. enis zemoqme-
debis Zala erTob gansazRvrulia imiT, rom misi meSveobiT `naTeli yvela-
feri, rac warsulSi Seuqmnia xalxs, zemoqmedebas axdens individze, xolo
adamianis individualoba enis individualobis analogiuria~. humboldtis
naazrevSi `xalxisa~ da èris~ cnebebi identuria. `sxvadasxva enebi, miuTi-
Tebs humboldti, sruliadac ar arian erTi da igive sagnis sxvadasxvagva-
ri aRniSvnebi, aramed am sagnis sxvadasxvagvari xedvani. ena Tavis `TavSi yo-
velTvis Seasxams xorcs mTeli xalxis Taviseburebas~ (ènaTa Seswavlis Se-
saxeb~). ena, uSualod da upirveles yovlisa, sagnisa Tu movlenis logikur
arss ki ar aRniSnavs, aramed imas, Tu rogor dainaxa da aRiqva igi erovnulma
msoflSegrZnebam, xasiaTma; imas da imgvarad gamoavlens, rasac zogjer Si-
1
cda qarTuli kulturis sxvadasxva formis Sinagani mTlianobis problemas-
Tan miaxloebisa.
112
griver farulava _ qarTuli ena, literatura da sarwmunoeba, miwa-wyali da qarTveli
nagan formas uwodeben. sityva ar aris sagnis ekvivalenti, aramed igi Tval-
Taxedvaa sagnis Sesaxeb. TvalTaxedva ki eTnosidan, bunebidan iRebs saTaves,
magaliTad ase: warmarTuli rwmenis dagdeba da WeSmarit RmerTTan ziareba
qarTvelobas sibnelidan gamoRwevad da sinaTlesTan miaxlebad aRuqvams:
`naTlisReba~; meaTe saukunis rusis TvalTaxedvas upiratesoba jvrisTvis
miuniWebia: `kreSCenie~; rac Seexeba berZnebs, am aqtis gamoTqmisaTvis ufro
Sesatyvisad maT naTlisRebis ritualis is momenti moCvenebiaT, roca ada-
mians wyalSi CauSveben `baptisma~ (`Cayuryumelaveba~); mzis mopirdapire
mxares wvimis wveTebSi mzis sxivebis gadatexisas rom Svidferi rkali Cndeba,
es qarTvels cis sartylad aRuqvams (`cisartyela~); xolo inglisels igive
`wvimis mSvildad~ (`rainbau~) warmodgomia. saxarebaSi vkiTxulobT: hurias-
tanidan galileas mimavali macxovari `sabanelis~ napirTan migdebul momak-
vdav kacs fexze wamoayenebs, xolo huriaT ganumartavs: `romelman sityuani
Cemni ismines da hrwmenes momavlinebeli Cemi, aqundes cxoreba saukuno, da
sasjelsa igi ara Sevides, aramed gardaicvalos igi sikudilisagan cxo-
rebad~ (ioane, 5,24). xazgasmuli fraza Zvel berZnul teqstSi ase ikiTxeba:
aseTi kaci `gadavida sikvdilidan sicocxlisaken~. `gadavida~ zis laTinur,
rusul da germanul TargmanebSi. gveCveneba, rom `gadavida~ aubraloebs, me-
qanikuri moZraobis iers aniWebs saTqmels, xolo `gardaicvala~ ufro Rrmaa
da ufro esatyviseba mistikur Sinaarss (yovel SemTxvevaSi, qarTulma eT-
nosma originalurad dainaxa da Tavisebur samoselSi gamoawyo saTqmeli).
rom sityva, saxeldeba eris msoflgancdas, eTikur da esTetikur fase-
ulobebs gaamJRavnebs, saintereso sjas amis Sesaxeb gvTavazobs giorgi ga-
Cevi: `saqarTveloSi Rirebulebebi sxva sferoSi Zevs zneobriv-mxatvrul
maxsovrobaSi. saqarTvelosTvis ucxoa gandidebis idea. amas mowmobs àR-
maSenebeli~, `Tavdadebuli~, `brwyinvale~. pativdebulia eTikuri da esTe-
tikuri kategoriebi, arasabrZolo da arajariskaculi. magram, Tu saomar
kategoriebsac afaseben ara nebismieri gziT miRweul gamarjvebas da di-
debas, aramed brZolaSi gamoCenil zneobas. Rirseba aRemateba mzakvrobiT
miRweul gamarjvebas. saqarTveloSi mizani ar amarTlebs saSualebas~ (`sa-
qarTvelos kosmosofia~).
imis kvalobaze, rom eTnosis sulier fizionomias STambeWdavad ga-
acxadebs ena (dedaena), ityvian, rom Cven vcxovrobT Cvenganve agebul samya-
roSi. xolo am samyaros ZiriTadi Strixebi eTnosis Camoyalibebis Soreul
saukuneebSi ikargeba. martin haidegeri ambobs: ena `yofierebis pirvelsacx-
ovrisiao~. saganTa da movlenaTa uzarmazari samyaro gaenovndeba, azrov-
nebidan yofierebaSi Camova eris sulisa da TvalaTaxedvis individualur
`kostiumSi gamowyobili~. azri cdilobs gamoxatvas, bgeriT Seimoseba, ver-
balizirdeba~ (hans georg gadameri, `filosofia da literatura~). dRes
113
bevr sityvaSi minavlebulia eTnikuri msoflxedvis impulsi, isini Camqral

vulkanebs gvanan; didi poezia da folklori gaacocxlebs xolme maT.
ena azrebis mSobeli da gamformebelia. amaSi unda davinaxoT misi zo-
gadsakacobrio misia. enis saSualebiT `ZaluZs adamians saimedod daeuf-
los Tavis azrebs, axali formebiT Semosos igi, SeumCneveli gaxados is
borkilebi, romlebsac wminda azris siswrafesa da mTlianobaze adebs Tavis
moZraobaSi ganuwyvetliv ganmacalkevebeli da SemaerTebeli ena. amasTan
erTad, ena aRniSnavs, xolo sinamdvileSi qmnis, iersaxesa da gamarTulobas
aniWebs bundovan azrebs~ (`xasiaTi enisa da xasiaTi xalxisa~). rogorc vxe-
davT, didi mecnieri garkveviT ambobs, rom enis umaRlesi daniSnuleba aris
ara aRniSvna, aramed Seqmna (aRniSvnasa da elementarul informaciis miwo-
debas adamianze dabla mdgomi cocxali arsebanic axerxeben met-naklebad).
ase rom, ènas mimarTeba aqvs ufro kulturasTan, vidre logikasTan. enis
organizaciaSi ZiriTadi simZime samyaros `gaenovnebis~ mniSvnelobebs aqvs~
(g. ramiSvili, `dedaenis Teoria~).2 da radgan `gaenovnebis~ aqti adamianuri
gonis ZalisxmeviT sagnis kulturul msoflxedvad warmodgeba, humboldti
ityvis, rom 1. èna aris warmoqmna (Erzeugung) da ara warmonaqmni (Erzeugte). 2.
ena energiaa da ara ergoni, enis statikuri mdgomareoba~ (g. ramiSvili `de-
daenis Teoria~).
enis raobis interpretaciisas yuradRebas ZiriTadad imas miapyro-
ben, Tu rogor mimarTebaSia ena azrovnebisa da aRqmis unarTan: èna azrebis
Semqmneli organoa~, ganmartavs humboldti, xolo amasTan dakavSirebiT g.
ramiSvili miuTiTebs, rom germaneli mecnieri enis formis definicias gvaZ-
levs, roca ityvis: gonis moRvaweoba, raTa azrebi gardaqmnas enad, `mimar-
Tulia iqiTken, rom bgera aRiWurvos azris gamoxatvis unariT~ (g. ramiSvi-
li, ènis energeistuli Teoriis sakiTxebi~).
raki samyaro, sagani Tu movlena Cven iseTad warmogvidgeba, rogora-
dac maT Cveni dedaena gvawvdis, enas cnebaTamgebad, warmoqmna-Semoqmedebad
miiCneven da g. ramiSvili aseT Tvalsazriss ènergeistuls~ uwodebs.
gonidan azrovnebasa da enaSi gadmoRvril am energias unda gulisxmob-
des ernst kasireri, roca ambobs: ènobrivi msoflxedvis mopoveba Zalze
Zneli procesia. enobrivi cnebaTwarmoebis winsvla grZnobad-konkretuli-
dan kategoriul-zogadisken rTuli da mZime amocanaa~ (`ra aris adamiani~).
`rTuli da mZime~ aq imaze migviTiTebs, rom erovnul-koleqtiuri gonis
Zalmosileba saukuneebis sigrZeze Taobebis Rvwas moiTxovs, raTa enobrivi
2
qarTveli enaTmecnieri guram ramiSvili germaniaSi, ienis universitetSi,
muSaobda wlebis ganmavlobaSi. iqve daicva sadoqtoro disertacia - ènis Si-
nagani formis problema Tanamedrove lingvistikaSi~ - 1970 wels. Cven mis naS-
romebs vemyarebiT, ZiriTadad ki viyenebT TviT humboldtis gamokvlevaTa
erTtomeuls, moskovSi rom gamoica 1985w. (` ~, romlis
redaqtori a. guligasTan erTad iyo g. ramiSvili).
114
msoflxedva da cnobiereba gamoikveTos. yoveli warmateba ki am gzaze adami-

anis Tavisuflebisa da SemoqmedebiTi niWis dasturia. meoce saukunis didi
germaneli filosofosi paul tilixi (meore msoflio omis dros amerikaSi
gadasaxlebuli) ambobs: `TiToeuli ena aris kulturuli Semoqmedebis uT-
valavi aqtis Sedegi. adamianis sulieri cxovrebis yvela funqcia damyare-
bulia am adamianis unarze ilaparakos xmamaRla Tu TavisTvis. ena es aris
mocemuli situaciisagan da am situaciis konkretuli moTxovnilebebisagan
adamianis Tavisuflebis gamoxatuleba. igi adamians sZRvnis universaliebs,
romelTa daxmarebiT mas ZaluZs qmnides samyaroebs teqnikuri civiliza-
ciis mocemul samyaroze, da agreTve sulier Sinaarss qmnides~ (`kulturis
Teologia~). filosofosi gvmoZRvravs: sityvaTagan Sedgenili winadade-
bebiT gacxaddeba, `gaenovndeba~ esa Tu is kanonzomiereba bunebisa Tu ada-
mianuri sinamdvilisa, fizikosma Tu fsiqologma rom aRmoaCina. enis saSu-
alebiT situaciisagan Tavisufleba imaSi gamovlindeba, rom enis iaraRiT
gadavlaxavT dro-sivrcul dasazRvrulobas. magaliTad, mexuTe saukuneSi
dawerili wigniT Semdgom mosul Taobebs gvesaubrebian, gvauwyeben, gvim-
tkiceben, uaryofen, Sexedulebebs Tu faseulobebs gviziareben da ase Sem-
deg. xolo Cven, Cvens mxriv, vesityvebiT maT, vmdidrdebiT maTi naazreviT
an ar viziarebT raRacas. momavalSi rom daibadebian, imaTTan Cvenc gveqneba
urTierToba dedaenis meSveobiT, romelsac aseulobiT Taobis saganTxed-
vis, msoflSegrZnebis beWedi azis, Cvenc vereviT maT cxovrebaSi. enobri-
vi msoflxedvis RerZze ase aisxmeba mravalricxovan TaobaTa wyeba da ik-
veTeba xalxis, eris istoria. ena am procesis ubralo Tanamdevi ki ar aris,
aramed misi maorganizebeli Zalaa (sxva ZalasTan erTad), da eris WeSmariti
istoria faqtebisa da movlenebis statikuri grova ki ar aris, aramed sja
am Zalisa Tu RerZis siRrmiseul mniSvnelobaze. amgvari sja, Tavis mxriv,
eris istoriis sazrissa da mniSvnelobas gamoavlens. aseT istorias zogjer
eris `Sinagan istorias~ eZaxian. igi eTnosis sulis moZraobis mniSvnelova-
ni Tvisebebis Tu Strixebis `wakiTxviTaa~ STagonebuli, maT anarekls eZebs
istoriis garegnul movlenebSi. enis energeistuli Teoria enas istoriis
Tanmxlebis funqciidan istoriis amgeb fenomenad gadaiazrebs. amis Taoba-
ze humboldti ityvis: ènebi udavod ganekuTvnebian kacobriobis istoriis
amgeb Zalebs~, ènebi da maTi nairgvaroba unda ganvixiloT kacobriobis is-
toriis gamWol Zalad~ (`xasiaTi enisa da xasiaTi xalxisa~).
* * *
radgan ena warmodgenaTa amgebi Zalaa, mas adamianis da xalxis goniT
unarebs utoleben da ènergiis~-s cnebiT moixseneben. humboldtma eri
(xalxi) miiCnia kacobriobis goniTi ìndividualizaciis formad~, miuTi-
Tebs g. ramiSvili, magram iqve ganmarta, rom `pirobiTia gayofa: goni (in-
115
teleqti) da ena; sinamdvileSi es erTi da igivea. xalxTa èna aris maTive go-
ni da maTi goni aris maTive ena. inteleqtsa da enas Soris mijna ar arsebobs~
(ènaTa Sinaarsobrivi sxvaoba~).
erovnuli gonis ZalisxmevasTan SenivTebuli enobrivi cnobiereba,
TviTSegneba, saqarTveloSi, leonti mrovelis (XI s.) cnobiT, Cvens welTaR-
ricxvamde ukve gamovlenila farnavaz mefis (III s.) Rvawlis kvalobaze. mema-
tiane gvauwyebs: èse farnavaz iyo pirveli mefe qarTlsa Sina qarTlosisa
naTesavTagani. aman ganavrco ena qarTuli da arRara izraxeboda sxua ena
qarTlsa Sina, Tvinier qarTulisa (garda qarTulisa) da aman Seqmna mwignob-
roba qarTuli~. Cveni azriT, rac aq weria, ase SeiZleba gavigoT: raki Cven
vcxovrobT Cvenive eniT agebul samyaroSi, xolo ena cnebaTagebis, faseu-
lobaTa gamokveTis iaraRia, monaTesave tomTa (maSindel saqarTveloSic
rom mravlad iyvnen) erT saxelmwifod SekvrisaTvis, saerTo saxelmwifo
enis dadgenisaTvis, dakanonebisaTvis uzruniaT; sazogadoebis SigniT ur-
TierTgagebisa da saerToobis gancdis damkvidrebisaTvis garjilan: ga-
ucnobierebiaT, rom monaTesave eTnosTa erad CamoyalibebisaTvis mwig-
nobrul-kulturul faseulobaTa Seqmnis aucilebloba enobriv erTia-
nobas unda damyareboda (humboldtisaTvis eri, pirvel yovlisa, `goniTi
formaa~, adamianTa inteleqtualuri gaerTianebaa). farnavazma qarTuli
metyveleba samwignobri enis RirsebiT Semosa, berZnuli enis gverdiT da-
ayena.
òri umniSvnelovanesi periodi arsebobs saqarTvelos istoriaSi er-
Tiani saxelmwifos ideis ganxorcielebisa da orsave SemTxvevaSi enis rolis
saxelmwifoebrivi gageba wamoiwevs wina planze. erTia farnavazis moRvawe-
obis periodi da meore grigol xanZTelis epoqa, roca safuZveli eyreba
bagrationTa dinastias~ (avT. arabuli, `qarTuli metyvelebis kultura~).
ai, isic, giorgi merCuliseuli sja: `qarTlad friadi queyana aRi-
ricxebis, romelsaca Sina qarTuliTa eniTa Jami Seiwirvis da locva yo-
veli aResrulebis, xolo krielesoni berZnulad iTqumis, romel ars
qarTulad: ufalo wyaloba yav, gina Tu ùfalo Segwyalen~. es niSnavs: sa-
qarTvelod mTeli is miwa-wyali unda Seiracxos, sadac qristianuli RvTis-
msaxureba aRsruldeba da aRsruldeba igi qarTul enaze, e.i. kulturis ena
qarTulia. am formulirebis Sinaarsis komentirebisas umetesad mxolod
enis fenomens miapyroben yuradRebas. sinamdvileSi saqarTvelos, viTarca
saxelmwifos, sivrce da mTlianoba aq warmoidgineba or burjze dayrdno-
bil-daSenebulad: qristianuli sarwmunoeba, kultura da qarTuli ena (amis
Sesaxeb ix. Cveni narkvevi krebulSi `wmida grigol xanZTeli~)
paul tilixi ganmartavs da asabuTebs: `religiis forma aris kultu-
ra. es gansakuTrebiT naTlad Cans enaSi, religia rom iyenebs~ (`kulturis
Teologia~). xolo wminda ilia marTali gviqadagebs: `kultura da masTan
116
ganuyofeli intensiuri cxovreba kacobriobis Ronisa da simkvidris deda-

boZia, qvakuTxedia. igia TiTon dauSrobeli saTave Ronisa, igi RonisRonea
erisa~ (ài, istoria~).
grigol xanZTelis Rvawli da giorgi merCulis TvalTaxedva ganuyo-
fel mTlianobad saxavs sams: saqarTvelo, qarTuli ena da qristianuli re-
ligia kultura. arsebiTad es xom is Tvalsazrisia, rac ilia WavWavaZem ase
Camoayaliba: `sami RvTaebrivi saunje dagvrCa Cven mama-papaTagan: mamuli,
ena, sarwmunoeba~ (òriode sityva Tavad revaz Salvas Zis erisTavis kazlo-
vidgan `SeSlilis Targmnazeda~); rigic ki emTxveva erTmaneTs: samSoblo-
ena-sarwmunoeba.
amgvarive TvalTaxedviT ixureba akakis poema `Tornike erisTavi~. es
aris gamocxadeba, xilva sami wmindanisa: `nino, qeTevan da TviT Tamari~,
isini TviTRvTismSobels SehRaRadeben:
moec kurTxeva zeciT, maRalo,
da gadmosaxe Zlierad jvari,
rom aRadgino qarTveli eri,
dRes dacemuli da cocxal-mkvdari!
missa mxneobas, missa zneobas
ganumtkicebde aRmafrenasa
da Sens saqebrad, sadidebelad
nu daaviwyeb im tkbil enasa,
romliTac Tamar brZanebas scemda,
qeTevan marad Sen gadidebda
da nino Zisa Senisa mcnebas
Sengan rCeul ers uqadagebda!...
poeti gvmoZRvravs: saqarTvelos arsebobisaTvis, aRdgineba-gaZli-

erebisaTvis aucilebelia, raTa mas `moeces kurTxeva zeciT~, religiuri
àRmafrena~; xolo aseTi àRmafrena~ unda warimarTebodes, `ganmtkicde-
bodes~ im `tkbili eniT~, romliTac samive wmindani esityveboda ufals da
qarTvelobas. Cvens winaSea isev da isev ganuyofeli mTlianoba samisa: saqar-
Tvelo-qarTuli ena-qristianoba.
ra Tqma unda, gamoricxulia, rom aq merCulis wignis raime gavlena da-
vinaxoT. `grigol xanZTelis cxovrebam~ dRis sinaTle mxolod 1911 w. ixila.
`Tornike erisTavi~ 1884 wels daiwera, xolo ilias òriode sityva...~ 1860
wels. es aris qarTveli eris erovnul-saxelmwifoebrivi da kulturuli
TviTSegnebis programuli koncefcia, Tvalsazrisi, sakmaod adre rom gaR-
viZebula, xolo grigol xanZTelisa da giorgi merCulis Taobebma TavianT
droSas daaweres. igi saukuneTa sigrZeze xSirad minavldeboda, magram ar
dakargula, ilias, akakisa da vaJas Taobam gaaRviZa. Tamaz Cxenkeli ityvis
amis Taobaze: `giorgi merCulis epoqis Semdeg ilia, akaki da vaJa iyvnen sa-
117
qarTvelos tomobrivad daqsaqsuli sxeulis gamTlianebis pirveli ideo-

logebi~ (`mSvenieri mZlevari~).
kidev erTi adgili giorgi merCulis wignSi, qarTul enas rom exeba. Ca-
moTvlilia umTavresTagani im sazrunavTagan, romelTa daufleba-erTgu-
leba qmnida `netarTa maT cxovrebis~ principebs, Sinaarss: aseTia: `moTmine-
ba simdabliT da simSvidiT, marxva, locviT SezRudvili, siwmid gulisa
da WeSmariteba enisa~. Tu yuradRebas mivaqcevT im faqts, rom ènis WeSma-
riteba~ moqceulia maRali sulierebisaken gzis gamkvlev asketur saTnoe-
baTa mwkrivSi, erTob daZabuli Rvwis nayofad rom moipovebian, nakleb sa-
varaudoa, rom aq enis, viTarca saxelmdeblis, saganze oden mimaniSneblis
gramatikulad gamarTuli codna igulisxmebodes. `WeSmariteba enisa~ am
konteqstSi qarTuli enis wiaRSi akumulirebuli sulier-inteleqtualu-
ri energiis Sesaxeb unda miuTiTebdes, razec ase sagulisxmod metyvelebs
ara mxolod ukve gaanalizebuli koncefcia (`qarTlad friadi queyana aRi-
ricxebis...~), aramed giorgi merCulis wignis enobrivi qsovili.
roca grigol xanZTelisa da giorgi merCulis enobriv TvalTaxedvaze
vsjiT, kidev erTi faqtia gasaxsenebeli. grigols rom mowafeebi afxazeTs
(dasavleT saqarTveloSi) gaeparebian, erT-erT maTgans, ilarions, Tan mi-
aqvs wignebi (àqundes mas keTilni wignni~). grigoli rom afxazeTs Camodis,
masac moaqvs wignebi. man dasavleT saqarTveloSi aago ubisis monasteri da
ilarioni `daadgina mamasaxlisad~. `mamamanca grigol Tsni wignni, romel
aqundes, da-ve-utevna monastersa mas~. ra Tqma unda, ès keTilni wignni~
qarTuli wignebi iyo da is adamianebi, romelTac saqarTvelos mTlianobisa
da damoukideblobis sayrdenad qristianuli religia da qarTuli ena miaC-
ndaT, dasavleT saqarTveloSi monasters aSeneben da RvTismsaxurebis enad
qarTuls aweseben sanacvlod berZnulisa (`qarTlis cxovrebis~ wignebs
Zvel saqarTveloSi ase moixsenebdnen: `wmidani ese wignni~, `patiosanni ese
wignni~).
didad erudirebuli qarTveli lingvisti g. ramiSvili dasaxelebul
wignSi gvTavazobs sanimuSod argumentirebul interpretacias grigol xan-
ZTelisa da giorgi merCulis enobrivi TvalTaxedvis siRrmeze (ratomRac
TiTqmis uyuradRebod rom darCaT qarTuli literaturisa da saqarTve-
los istoriis mkvlevarT).
movixmobT umTavress am sjaTagan: `merCulesTan napovni definicia
imdenad uzadoa, rom masSi universaluri rangis principi cnaurdeba: ki-
lo-kavTa, saojaxo enaTa da dialeqtur variaciaTa nairgvar bgeriTsa Tu
xilul konkretul mocemulobaSi SeamCnio da gamoarCio uxilavi da Tanac
zogadi goniTi principi, rac maT Soris igiveobrivia da amave dros umTav-
resi~ (`dedaenis Teoria~).
`friadi qveynis~ idea, ganmartavs g. ramiSvili, uTuod gulisxmob-
da, enis faqtoris, rogorc qveynis `garegani bunebrivi sazRvrisagan~ gan-
118
sxvavebul `Sinagani sazRvris~ kriteriums. mTebis, mdinareebis... nacvlad

Sinagani bunebrivi sazRvaria ena, romelsac miubrundebian xolme an gulis-
xmoben istoriis mTel manZilze. es mniSvnelovani faqtia: aris tomTa mety-
velebiTi nairsaxeobani, TviT megrulisa da svanuris saxiT, magram dialeq-
ti an kilo ki ar aris gamoyenebuli sazRvris kriteriumad, aramed saerTo
sociologiuri fenomeni, saliteraturo qarTuli, rac zegadamwvdomia da
Sinagani; sadac qarTuli ena gaismis, iqaa saqarTvelo~. miTiTebulia, rom im-
Jamindeli qarTuli saxelmwifoebrivi azrovneba isea dawinaurebuli, rom
daZleulia bunebrivi geografiuli StrixebiT (mdinare, mTa) saxelmwifo
sazRvrebis dadgena; arc mxolod eTnografiuli principis momarjveba ga-
modgeba; gadalaxulia sisxliT naTesaobis monacemic. monaTesave tomebs
garda, saqarTveloSi aramonaTesave tomebic cxovroben, romlebic swored
eniT erTiandebian sisxliT danaTesavebul (qarTvelur) tomebTan. saerTo
msoflxedvasTan (romlis xerxemali enobrivi msoflgancdaa) nebayoflobi-
Ti ziarebis faqtiT moiazreboda `friadi qveynis~ Sinaarsi (`dedaenis Teo-
ria~).
`qarTuli cnobierebis maRali safexuri, ambobs g. ramiSvili, maSin ga-
movlinda, roca qarTveli eris arsebobis goniTi winapiroba iqna aRmoCeni-
li da igi giorgi merCulem gamoTqva... es aris saqarTvelos saxelmwifoeb-
rivi gansazRvra... `locva yoveliT~ amyarebs qarTveli RmerTTan kavSirs...
raki igi qarTulad sruldeba, amiT yoveli mlocveli Sinaganad erTiande-
ba erT did sazogadoebaSi, rasac `friadi qveyana~ anu mTeli saqarTvelo
hqvia. qarTul sityvas miniWebuli aqvs RvTiuri Zala da am Zalis SegrZneba
gamsWvalavs sazogadoebis yovel wevrs~. erovnuli cnobierebac maSin ya-
libdeba. es aris TariRi eTnosidan erad gadaqcevisa (`dedaenis Teoria~).
rogorc ukve iTqva, merCulis TvalTaxedviT, enisa da sarwmunoebis
cnebebi ganuyofel mTlianobad emsaxureba qarTvelTa erovnuli vinaobisa
da saqarTvelos mTlianobis ideas. amis Taobaze am samiode wlis winaT ga-
moqveynebul erT-erT narkvevSi naTqvamia: `sarwmunoebasa da enas tolpir-
veladi mniSvneloba aqvs. ena imdenadaa mniSvnelovani, ramdenadac is sar-
wmunoebis enad gadaiqceva~ (s. ratiani, sekularizacia da qarTveli eris
dabadeba).
es ar aris qrestomaTiuli azri, magram 1957 wels msgavs Tvalsazriss
paul tilixi aswavlida amerikis SeerTebuli Statebis erT-erT universi-
tetSi. kerZod, rom enis gareSe ar arsebobs rwmenis aqti, ar arsebobs reli-
giuri gamocdileba da rom es exeba, saerTod, enas da gansakuTrebul enas,
adamianis sulieri cxovrebis nebismier funqcias.
ase rom, humboldtis sulieri memkvidreebi naxevar saukuneze ufro
adre sauniversiteto kursebSi aswavlidnen, rom enis faseuloba umTavre-
sad imiTaa ganpirobebuli, ramdenadac mas religiuri WeSmariteba ganwonis,
119
ramdenadac enobrivi qsovili religiur-filosofiur ZiebaTa uRrmes Sre-

ebsa da simaRleebs wvdeba da zidavs.
`maradiulisagan~ pirvelmizezisaganaa `CaRvrili~ enaSi energia, rac
enas warmoqmnad xdis, rogorc amas humboldti daadgens (amaze ukve vsaub-
robdiT). ufliseuli dvrita Rvivis sityvaSi, es dvrita sityvad iZerweba
adamianis gonebaSi, sityvad ametyveldeba Cveni swrafva maradisobisaken. am
swrafvas, romelsac `pirvel guliswadils~ eZaxis humboldti, `Cven viRebT
enidan~ (àrsebuli Tanamonawileobs arsSi~, paul tilixi, `yofnis simama-
ce~). amgvari SinaarsiT dakvalianebuli da mizan-mimarTulebiT nawrTobi
enaa WeSmariti ena, Tavis upirveles daniSnulebas rom usworebs Tvals.
umravles SemTxvevaSi g. ramiSvilis sjani giorgi merCulis definici-
is Sesaxeb sarwmunoebisa da enis ganuyofeli mTlianobis Tvalsazriss emsa-
xureba: `qristianuli moZRvrebis zneobrivma simaRlem, rac isev `bibliis~
TargmniT da qarTuli eniT SeiWra yovel qarTvel tomSi, iseT doneze as-
wia Segneba morwmunisa, rom erTiani saqarTvelos idea Camoayalibebina. mi-
viReT eri `maRali gagebiT~... dedaeniT gvaqvs fuZe ganmtkicebuli da enis
sulierebiT erovnuloba... giorgi merCulem mTeli siRrmiT gaiazra ena-
rjulis kavSiri~ (`dedaenis Teoria~).
merCuliseuli definicia, Cveni qveynis kulturulsa da saxelmwifo-
ebriv TviTmyofobas rom afuZnebs, im mxrivac uzadoa, rom zogadsaqris-
tiano sisxlZarRvzedac miuTiTebs: mTeli RvTismsaxureba qarTul enaze
aRsruldeba, oRond `krieleisoni berZnulad iTqumis~. germaneli qar-
Tvelologi vinfrid boederi (oldenburgis universiteti) amis Taobaze
ambobs: `berZnuli krieleisoni~ qarTvelebs simbolurad mTel saqristia-
nosTan akavSirebs~ (èna da vinaoba qarTvelTa istoriaSi~). e.i. giorgi mer-
Cule TviTmyof qarTul kulturas da saqarTvelos (`friad qveyanas~) ar ke-
tavs viwrod gagebuli nacionalurobis artaxebSi.
RvTisken swrafva, WeSmaritebasTan miaxleba TavisuflebasTan azia-
rebs adamians: `scna WeSmariti da WeSmaritebaman gangaTavisuflen Tquen~
(iovane, 8,32). qarTul gonsa da sulSi, gvmoZRvravs merCule, qarTuli eniT
gacxaddeba, am enaSi ibadeba da ametyveldeba ufali (Jami Seiwirvis da loc-
va yoveli aResrulebis~). amis ZaliT, amis kvalobaze da amavdroulad qar-
Tuli eTnosi iqceva qarTvel erad. qristianoba da qarTuli ena, maTi ganu-
yofeli mTlianobaa sulierad mSobeli Cveni. orive eufleba individs, aq-
cevs mas pirovnebad, Sehyavs namdvil arsebobaSi. e.i. merCule, arsebiTad,
ukve msjelobs dedaenaze, RvTis xatad da msgavsad, imavdroulad qarTve-
lad Cvens mSobelsa da Camomyalibebelze (Cven vfiqrobT, rom am Rrma azriT
uwoda iakob gogebaSvilma Tavis wigns `deda ena~).
120
* * *
giorgi aToneli, avtori originaluri hagiografiuli nawarmoebisa
`cxovreba ioanesi da eqvTimesi~, mogviTxrobs: ioanem Svili jer qarTul
enaSi, Semdgom ki `berZnulad gaaswavla yovliTve swavlulebiTa srule-
biT~. imis gamo, rom eqvTime bavSvobidanve mowyda samSoblos da saberZneT-
Si izrdeboda, xolo berZnul enas `srulebiT~, zedmiwevniT daufleboda,
mSobliuri enis Zali da madli masSi cxadad iSriteboda, `Zniad ubnobn qar-
Tulad~; àrcaRa sityua daSTomili iyo mis Tana da arca ma~. eqvTime mZi-
med dasneulda. momakvdav ymawvils RvTismSobeli gamoecxada da `hrqua qar-
TuliTa eniTa: ra ars, ra gelmis, efTvime~. eqvTimes upasuxia: `movkudebi,
dedofalo~. gamocxadebis am ambavs mere, ukve sawolze wamomjdari eqvTime
uyveba mamas: RvTismSobeli `momeaxla da mipyra elsa da mrqua: àrara ars
vneba Sen Tana, aRdeg, nu geSinin da qarTulad snilad ubnobdi~ (gamarTu-
lad, Tavisuflad laparakobde). eqvTime sruliad gajansaRda, xolo qar-
Tuli `viTarca wyaro aRmodin uwmindes yovelTa qarTvelTasa~.
mSobliur enasTan daSoreba eqvTimes `rogorc sulier, ise xorciel
dasneulebad SeugrZvnia... roca gacocxlda masSi qarTuli sityva, manamde
avadmyofi eqvTime sxeuliTac gankurnebula. ena mxolod sulieri Zala ki
ar aris, aramed adamianis suliT-xorcieli simrTelis safuZvelia~ (r. sira-
Ze, èqvTime aToneli~).
vecdebiT CavuRrmavdeT am epizods.
adamianuri individualobis dvrita ioanes Svilis arsebaSi adreve iq-
neboda fexadgmuli, magram jer kidev yrma miiyvanes saberZneTSi da Seud-
gnen mis wvrTnas `berZnulad yovliTave swavlulebiTa srulebiT~.
ènobrivi unarianoba, ambobs humboldti, dafuZnebulia yvela
calkeuli adamianis sulis siRrmeSi, magram mxolod urTierTobisas amoZ-
ravdeba~ (`xasiaTi enisa da xasiaTi xalxisa~). saberZneTSi moxvedrili eq-
vTimesaTvis mSobliuri enis àmoZravebis~ areali mozRuduli iyo.
jer kidev yrmis axlad fexadgmul gancdas mSobliuri enisa, sulie-
rebisa, stiqionis ZaliT daawveboda berZnuli enisa da sulierebis erTob
mZlavri, didebuli samyaro. gasagebia, rom am uzarmazarma fenomenma gar-
kveuli daRi daasva jer moumwifebel gonebasa da suls yrmisa, daasusta
maTi davaJkacebis, gamokveTis bunebrivi sasicocxlo wyaros zemoqmedebis
Zala.
èna iqceva mSoblad da aRmzrdelad yvelafrisa, rac umaRlesi da
udaxvewilesia kacobriobaSi~ (humboldtis imave narkvevidan). rogorc
Cans, qarTuli ena, viTarca eqvTimes ùmaRlesi da udaxvewilesi mSobeli
da aRmzrdeli~, ymawvilis qvecnobierebis siRrmeSi aRmdgara ucxo enis (da
sulierebis) mimZlavrebis mosagerieblad, adamianis individualobis RvTi-
sagan kurTxeuli uflebebisa da Rirsebebis dasacavad. magram jer kidev
121
bavSvis arc sxeulis, arc sulis xerxemali ar iyo gamagrebuli da erTsac

da meoresac erTob SesWirvebia (àrcaRa sityua daSTomil iyo mis Tana da
arca ma~).
yrmis sasicocxlo Zalebi rom ileoda, maSin gamoecxada eqvTimes
RvTismSobeli da `qarTulad xsnilad ubnobis~ Zali da madli aRudgina,
sicocxlis wyarosTan (mSobliuri enis wiaRTan) damakavSirebeli fesvebi,
Wknoba rom SehparvodaT, gaucocxla.
ioanem adreve SeamCnia, rom misi Svili RvTis samsaxurisaTvis, wminda
wignebis qarTulad gadmoRebisaTvis daebadebina ufals, saamiso niWisa da
Zalis wyarod misTvis mSobliuri enis wiaRi ganeCinebina. aseTi wyaros denas
ki veraferi SeaCerebs. gana amas ar moaswavebs RvTismSoblis gamocxadeba da
qarTulad mimarTva sneulisadmi: àrara ars vneba SenTana, aRdeg, nu geSi-
nin da qarTulad xsnilad ubnobdi~. es xom niSnavs: Seni avadobis mizezs me
vuwamleb, qarTulad Tavisuflad metyvelebis unars aRgidgen. xom cxadad
zrunavs RvTismSobeli RvTis neba-ganCinebis aRsasruleblad.
imave wignSi (`xasiaTi enisa da xasiaTi xalxisa~) ityvis humboldti:
èna aZlevs adamianebs winamZRvrebs Sinagan ZalTa ganviTarebisaTvis; roca
veswrafviT maradiuls, pirvel guliswadils, SemarTebas am gzaze Cven
viRebT enidan~.
Turme `gulSi~ inaxeba imis Zala da unari, rom `maradiulisaken~, RvTa-
ebrivisaken `swrafvis~ niWi ar Caqres adamianSi, da enis saSualebiT acocx-
lebdes am niWs. aq ar gamovekidebiT imaze sjas, rom, wminda werilis mixed-
viT, swored gulSia akumulirebuli zecisaken swrafvis energia, aqvea misi
pirvelwyaro. xolo poeti ityvis:
Zneli rodi aris povna,
rac ramaa dakarguli,
radgan, rasac kargavs xsovna,
Rrmad inaxavs Cveni guli.
(galaktioni).
yrma eqvTimes xsovnaSi rom mSobliuri enis niWi ikargeboda, maradi-

sobasTan mimaaxlebeli madli rom iSriteboda, gulSi, RvTaebrivis pirvel-
wyaroSi, igi Senaxuliyo da, giorgi aTonelis sityvebi rom gavimeoroT, `vi-
Tarca wyaro aRmodinda~ RvTismSoblis TanadgomiT.
aseTia eqvTime da giorgi aTonelebis Rvawlis areali, masStaburoba:
igic zogadsakacobriosa (religiuris) da erovnulis organul, ganuyofel
mTlianobad warmogvidgeba. maTi urTierTgamsWvalvis idea xom jer kidev
grigol xanZTelis RvawlSi amoikiTxeba cxadad.
ena, viTarca Zala da unari, energia da iaraRi msoflSegrZnebisa, Tavi-
si arsiT, principuli SinaarsiT ukve moazrebulia didi aTonelebis cnobi-
122
erebaSi da cxadad akvalianebs maTi Rvawlis Sinaarssa da formas. rodesac

isini cdiloben, qristianuli sulierebis upirvelesi Zeglebi, biblia da
wminda mamaTa wignebi, qarTulad gadmoiRon, yvelaze saimedo saSualebad
am zogadsakacobrio faseulobaTa gadmonergvisa isini mSobliuri enis xa-
siaTs saxaven, konkretulSi, erovnuli individualobisa da pirvelsawyis-
Ta wiaRSi pouloben zogadsakacobrio faseulobaTa, ideaTa momxelTebel
formebs; `SemarTebas am gzaze iReben enidan~. igive humboldti sxvagan ity-
vis: ùnarTa energiuli gamovlena warmoudgenelia Cvens pirvelsawyis bu-
nebriv monacemTa gulmodgine SenarCunebis gareSe ar arsebobs energia in-
dividualobis miRma~ (goeTes `hermanisa da doroTeas~ Sesaxeb~).
grigol robaqiZe am naxevari saukunis winaT werda: `rom SemekiTxon,
romel nawarmoebSi ufro vgrZnob qarTvelobas, vityvi: giorgi merCules
aRwera-gadmoSlaSi grigol xanZTelis cxovrebisa. ùfro vinaTgan aq
haerovnul ifineba zemiwieri qarTul miwaze~. `zemiwieri~, RvTaebrivi,
`haerovnul~ ganwonis qarTuli eTnosis individualobaso, eTerovani sim-
subuqiT Seezaveba `qarTul miwaso~... xolo es rom aRsruldeba ènis WeSma-
ritebiT~, amas, rogorc iTqva, TviT merCule qadagebs. didma aTonelebma
es gza ganagrZes, RvTis igavmiuwvdomel WeSmaritebas isini qarTuli ènis
WeSmaritebiT~, am enis, viTarca energiis, viTarca warmomqnelis, individu-
alur gamomsaxvelobiT saSualebaTa ZalmosilebiT miuaxlovdnen. aki sam-
werlobo Rvawlis kvalobaze Seiracxnen isini wmindanebad. `luTeris Tar-
gmani Tu aris enis enis-qmna, mTawmindelebis Targmanic enis-qmnaa (g. robaqi-
Ze, `saqarTvelos xerxemali~).
nikoloz berdiaevi ganmartavs: `yoveli eris yofas religiuri safuZ-
veli aqvs. erovnuli da religiuri momentebi gadawnulia erTmaneTSi da zo-
gierT wertilSi idumalebriv eduRebian erTmaneTs~ (èri da kacobrioba).
RvTismSoblis Tanadgoma abrunebs yrma eqvTimes mSobliuri enis wiaR-
Si, vinaidan swored am fenomenis Zalasa da madls xelewifeba, yvelaze ukeT
gauZRves RvTismSoblis wilxvedr qveyanas zecisaken. zeciurs Tu zogad-
sakacobrios fesvebi miwierSi, erovnulSi aqvs gadgmuli. religiur-kul-
turuli Rvwa erovnul-saxelmwifoebriv interesebs umagrebda zurgs da
saerTaSoriso sarbielze pativsa da saxels uqmnida saqarTvelos. aToneli
qarTvelebis muxlCauxreli mwignobruli garja am SegnebiTac iyo STagone-
buli. giorgi aToneli eqvTimeze ambobs: `mravalni wignni warscnis winaSe
daviT kurapalatisa, romelni igi ixilna ra, viTarca iyo morwmune, sixa-
ruliTa aRivso da adidebda RmerTsa da ityoda, viTarmed: `madli RmerTsa,
romelman CuenTa amaT JamTa axali oqropiri gamoaCina. da zedas-zeda mou-
wern, raTa Targmnides da warscemdes~. am faqtze ityvis germaneli qarTve-
lologi vinfrid boederi: `qarTuli wignebi saqarTvelos samefos presti-
Jis dasturi iyoo~ (èna da vinaoba qarTvelTa istoriaSi~).
123
* * *
rac giorgi aTonelis nawarmoebSi mSobliuri enis Zalad da unarad,
energiad aris moazrebuli, qarTuli galobis imgvarive Zalad da madladaa
warmosaxuli iakob gogebaSvilis moTxrobaSi ìavnanam ra hqmna~. moTxrobis
mTavari gmiri qeTo rom samSoblos mowyvites, mxolod mesame welSi iyo
gadamdgari. aTi weli gaatara man daRestanSi. yvelaze didxans qeTos mexsi-
erebas ìavnanas~ galoba SerCa, `magram esec daiviwya, Tumca yvelaze gvian~.
aTi wlis Semdeg, roca mSoblebma qeTo ukan daibrunes, ise gauWirdaT Svi-
lis arsebaSi misi namdvili vinaobis cnobiereba gaecocxlebinaT, rom ga-
tanjuli qeTos daRestans mibrunebac ki ifiqres.
mSvenieri dila idga. aTi wlis dumilis Semdeg magdana ìavnanas~ Ri-
Rins mohyva. Svilis saxeze rom aRelveba SeniSna, dedam xmas auwia. SesamCnevi
iyo, rom Svili `raRacas igonebda da ver moegonebina garkveviT. misi bune-
bis siRrmeSi didi xnis damarxuli xsovna iRviZebda, magram ver ki gamoeRvi-
Za. gonebis Ziridan raRac sanatreli mogoneba apirebda amoxeTqvasa, magram
zevidan keckecad awvnen sxva warmodgenani da uSlidnen maRla amosvlasa~.
cota xnis Semdgom `magdanas xmam uwia qeTos bunebis siRrmemdis, SesZra is
Zirianad da gaacocxla iq damarxuli bavSvobis sanatrelni naSTni, sagone-
belni~.
adamianis individualurobis fundamenti, maradisobisaken ltol-
vis pirvelwyaro damarxuli, minavlebuli yofila, magram ara daSretili.
fesvebs mowyvetili adamiani fesvebs miubrunda, daTrgunvili da gadake-
Tebuli suli imave niadagze gadairgo, saidanac amoizarda. bunebriv-adami-
anuris masazrdoebeli wyaro, qeTos arsebaSi ubedo bedisagan amRvreuli,
daiwminda. adamiani dadga im miwaze, romelzedac daTesa yovlis mTesvel-
ma, im Zirebs daemyara, romelzedac aRmoacena yovlis aRmomcenebelma da
mzrdelma. bindisgvari wuTisoflisgan dawylulebuls zesTasoflis na-
Telma uwamla. amaze ityoda rusTaveli:
RmerTsamca viT ar SeeZlo kvla gankurneba wylulisa?
igia mzrdeli yovlisa dangreul-daTesulisa!
vaJa-fSavela ki ase gvmoZRvravs: `roca bavSvi qveyanas ixilavs, mas,

garda haerisa, sadgom-sawolisa, esaWiroeba aRmzrdeli, rZe sazrdod, na-
na mosasveneblad~ (`kosmopolitizmi da patriotizmi~).
musikam, qarTulma xalxurma galobam, dedis gulidan da sulidan
gadmoRvrilma ìavnanam~ dauZaxa qeTos da daabruna igi samSoblos wiaRSi.
Cvilsac da albaT ori wlisasac ìavnaniT~ aZinebda deda. RvTaebrivi neta-
rebis gancdad daTesiliyo es galoba patara qeTos alal, wminda gulSi da
es xma, viT saRvTo sagalobeli, aTi wlis mtversac ver CaexSo, man iquxa, gon-
sac da sulsac uwia, WeSmariteba gamoabrwyina.
124
netari avgustine miuTiTebda, rom RvTaebrivTan Cvens misaaxleblad

xelovnebis yvela dargze Zalmosili aris musika; igi xSirad adamianis su-
lis iseT uRrmes vibraciebs gamoxatavs, romelsac ver swvdeba TviT sityva.
avgustines Semoqmedebis erTi mkvlevari ase ajamebs eklesiis didi mamis na-
azrevs: `xelovnebis yvela dargs Soris musika gvevlineba erTaderT saxeo-
bad, romelsac ZaluZs SeaRwios miRmur samyaroSi da rCeba maradisobaSi~ (k.
perli, àvgustine da musika~).
miRmur samyaroSi SeRwevisaTvis Zalmosilma mSvenierebam iakob goge-
baSvilis moTxrobis gmiris cnobierebaSic SeaRwia da qali Tavis qveyanasac
da Tavis vinaobasac daubruna.
* * *
`yvarlis mTebis~ avtori sulierad sakmaod momwifebuli, erovnuli
vinaobis fesvebTan sisxlxorceulad naziarebi swavlis gasagrZeleblad
miaSurebs peterburgs. da roca oTxi wlis Semdeg iqidan samSobloSi brun-
deba, Rrma safiqrals moucavs misi guli da goneba: moaqvs Tu ara peterbur-
gidan is simdidre Tu sazrdo, rac ase Sia da swyuria mis qveyanas. pativda-
sadebi SiSic axlavs fiqrebis am grexils; ucxoeTSi oTxi wliT dayovneba
safrTxilo ram aris axalgazrdisaTvis, ùcxo niadagze gadargulisa da aR-
zrdilisaTvis... bewvis xidia, sibnelisa da sinaTlis Sua bedisagan gadebu-
li... es is oTxi weliwadia, romelic Wabukis tvinsa da gulSi gamohkvanZavs
xolme cxovrebis iseT kvirts, romlidanac mSvenieri da brwyinvale mteva-
nic gamova da ZaRl-yurZenaca... netavi imas, ityvis mere darialis WiSkar-
Tan mdgari Tergdaleuli, visac es bewvis xidi ar Caswydomia~. rogorc
vxedavT, `bewvis xidze~ Semdgarad warmoudgeba ilias is axalgazrda, vinc
ucxoeTSi midis swavla-aRzrdisaTvis. xidi Cawydeba, Tu masze Semdgars
fesvebi ar amagreben (`ZaRl-yurZena~ gamoikvirteba), globalisturi usa-
xurobis nirvanaSi Caikargeba garkveuli saxiTa Tu jiSiT garkveul miwaze
RvTisagan damkvidrebuli eTnosis naSieri.
rogorc vxedavT, wminda ilia marTlis TvalsazrisiT, axalgazrdis
ùcxo niadagze gadargva~, swavla-aRzrdis mizniTac ki, sasurvelia mox-
des ise, rom masSi rigianad iyos gamokveTili Tavisi qveynis, xalxis suli
da xasiaTi. maSin SeinarCunebs igi `bewvis xidze~ wonasworobas; qvedamzid-
vel da egoistur sacdurTa damarcxebiT gakaJebuli Tavs daaRwevs `msof-
lio moqalaqeobis~ sacdursac. mSobliuri niadagi, ena, kultura da tra-
diciebi adamianis sulieri sijansaRis yvelaze Zlieri da saimedo fesvebia.
`maTi dakargva ara marto sivrcobrivi garemosa da garegnuli faqtorebis
dakargvaa, aramed Sinagani samyaros morRvevac~ (g. ramiSvili, `dedaenis Te-
oria~).
125
ra Tqma unda, `mgzavris werilebis~ konteqstSi xatovnad naTqvami

ùcxo niadagi~, umal ucxo enas gulisxmobs, viTarca adamianis vinaobis
upirveles `pasports~, xerxemals. amis Sesaxeb sakmaod iTqva narkvevis pir-
vel TavSi.
humboldtis Semdeg evropelma mecnierebma kidev ufro gaaRrmaves es
TvalTaxedva. ukve dadgenilia, rom arc erTi enis enobrivi safuZveli ar
aris azrTa warmoqmnis ubralo instrumenti. `bunebas Cven vanawevrebT Cve-
ni enis mier nakarnaxevi mimarTulebiT. movlenaTa samyaroSi Cven gamovyofT
ama Tu im kategoriebsa da tipebs ara imis wyalobiT, rom isini (es kategori-
ebi da tipebi) TavisTavad arian TvalsaCinoni; sapirispirod amisa, samyaro
Cven warmogvidgeba STabeWdilebaTa nakadis kaleidoskopad, romlis orga-
nizeba unda moaxdinos Cvenma gonebam; xolo es ZiriTadad imas niSnavs, rom
amas axdens Cvens cnobierebaSi Senaxuli enobrivi sistema~ (benjamen uorfi,
`qcevisa da azrovnebis mimarTeba enisadmi~).
amitom faqtiurad marcxiT damTavrda meoce saukunis sigrZeze wa-
mowyebuli yvela mcdeloba, SeeqmnaT erTi sayovelTao ena, romelzedac
ilaparakebda Cveni planetis yvela mkvidri. bunebrivis dajabna ver moxer-
xda, es bunebaze xelis aRmarTva iqneboda.
axla ki manqanuri civilizaciiTa da ufesvo internacionalizmiT STa-
gonebulni gviwinaswarmetyveleben, rom momavalSi mxolod ramdenime ena
moemsaxureba gulgamoWmuli globalizaciis gzaze Semdgar yvela xalxsa
Tu ers. zemoT dasaxelebul krebulSi ènebi, rogorc samyaros saxe~, da-
beWdilia am wignis redaqtoris kiril korolevis naSromi sagulisxmo sa-
TauriT ùniversaluri ena da universaluri damwerloba ocnebebis ga-
modevnebis gzaze~. aq vkiTxulobT: àrc erT bunebriv enas (vTqvaT, ingli-
surs Tu Cinurs, rusuls Tu arabuls, g.f), ra farTodac ar unda iyos igi
gavrcelebuli, ar ZaluZs gaxdes sayovelTao enad ramdenadac yoveli ena
aris konkretuli xalxis mentalobis nayofi, da amitom ùcxo nidagze~ ga-
dargvas Znelad egueba an saerTod ver egueba~. ara mxolod k. korelo-
vis narkvevis, aramed mTeli am krebulis ideuri paTosi swored is aris, rom
sxvagvarad verc iqneba (krebulisa, sadac Tavmoyrilia evropisa da amerikis
erTob avtoritetul lingvistTa naSromebi).
principuli Sinaarsi am TvalTaxedvisa igivea, rasac `mgzavris weri-
lebSi~ SeamCnevs dakvirvebuli mkiTxveli. ilia SiSobs: sxva miwa-wyalze,
sxva xasiaTisa da faseulobaTa samyaroSi, sul sxvagvari kulturis Sua-
gulSi oTxi wlis dayovnebam sruliad axalgazrda kacs xom ar dauCrdila
mSobeli qveynis kulturis xibli da Zala sulierebisa. korolevis narkvevis
citirebuli (magram swored aqcentirebuli) winadadebis erTi monakveTi ki
sityva-sityviT emTxveva ilia WavWavaZisas: es aris problema ùcxo nidagze
gadanergvisa~ (ra Tqma unda, aravis hgonia, rom rusi lingvisti ilia WavWa-
126
vaZis Txzulebas emyareba. imas ki vfiqrobT, rom ilia WavWavaZe icnobda v.

humboldtis lingvistur da anTropologiur nawerebs).
rogorc iTqva, wminda ilia marTali gvmoZRvravs: Tu axalgazrda kac-
Si moyvasisa da samSoblos miwa-wylis, erovnuli kulturis xiblis gancda
Rrmad araa CaTesili, ùcxo niadagzed gadargulsa da aRzrdils~ Rirse-
ul adamianad, namdvil mamuliSvilad Camoyalibeba gauWirdeba. aseT Tesls
ki ilia xatovnad `dvritad~ moixseniebs (dvrita sayveled SemTbari rZis
Sesadedebeli masala). saqarTvelos WiSkarTan moaxloebuli poeti ambobs:
egeb Cemma qveyanam `zurgic ar Semomaqcios, iqneb mimiTvisos kidec, radga-
nac CemSi maincdamainc Cemis qveynis dvritaa dadebuli~. davakvirdeT,
ras niSnavdes aq xatovnad moazrebuli `dvrita~. am sityvis sagnobrivi
Tu yofiTi Sinaarsi am frazaSi erTob sagulisxmo esTetikur Sinaarsadaa
sublimirebuli. `dvrita~ aq, Cveni azriT, niSnavs gens, jiSis (Tu saxeobis)
Teslsa da fuZes, romlidanac droTa manZilze amoizrdeba eTnogenotipi,
erovnuli xasiaTis individualuri, bunebrivi TviTmyofoba. roca adamianSi
SobiTve (uzenaesi mSoblisagan) Rrmadaa Camynili erovnuli xasiaTis TviT-
myofadi buneba, genetikuri vinaobis es Zala da madli saimedo potenciaa,
raTa adamianSi TandaTan aseve kargad gamoikveTos Tavisi vinaoba; oRond
amisTvis am `dvritas~ gulmodgine, faqizi movla, saTanado sazrdo da pi-
robebi sWirdeba, raTa gamagrdes, damwifdes mSobliur niadagze.3
amis Semdgom `mgzavris werilebis~ avtori Seudgeba sjas enis fenome-
nis raobis, siRrmiseuli potencialis Sesaxeb, enis, rogorc mravlismety-
veli saxis Sesaxeb. ra Tqma unda, sja warimarTeba poeturi formiT.
`Cemi enis sazRvrebi gansazRvravs Cemi samyaros sazRvrebs~, ityvis
ludvig vitgenSteini Tavis erTob gaxmaurebul `logikur-filosofiur
traqtatSi~. sityvis siRrmeSi Camarxulia potenciali, energia imisa, rom
obieqturi sinamdvilisa da subieqturi aRqmis gadakveTis wertilze gonis
aqtiurobis TanadgomiT Sobos axali sinamdvile da sityvis formiT gaacx-
ados igi.
èna aris adamianis sicocxlis procesi~ (p. hiunermani, fiqrebi sity-
visa da saidumloebaTa Teologiaze. `Tanamedrove eklesiologiis Teori-
is enobrivi aspeqti~). xolo sicocxlis procesad enas aqcevs ara garemoeba,
rom sagnebi da movlenebi `TavisTavad arian TvalsaCinoni~; ena mxolod ub-
ralo gamomxatveli ar aris imisa, rac enis daxmarebis gareSe Camoyalibda.
gavimeorebT: `samyaro Cven warmogvidgeba STabeWdilebaTa kaskadis kalei-
3
ai, ra afiqrebda, ris Sesaxeb gvafrTxilebda saukune-naxevris win ilia Wav-
WavaZe. es safiqrali dRes gacilebiT ufroa gasaTvaliswinebeli, vidre maSin
iyo. Cven xSirad ufesvo da `Wyint~ qal-vaJebs vgzavniT ucxoeTSi. rogorni
dagvibrundebian?! dagvibrundebian ki? maT Soris ukeTesebs, niWiT gamor-
CeulT saukeTeso pirobebs uqmnian da TavisTan itoveben. xom aris es serio-
zuli problema; ar unda gveSinodes?! ilia WavWavaZes eSinoda!..
127
doskopad~, romelsac erovnuli goni gadaiazrebs Tavisi eTnikuri xasiaTis

Sesabamisad, `gaaenovnebs~ Cvens cnobierebaSi damkvidrebuli enobrivi sis-
temis Sesabamisad. ase rom, àdamianebi cxovroben ara mxolod materialur
samyaroSi. garkveulwilad yvela maTgani im konkretuli enis gamgeblobas
eqvemdebareba, romelic am sazogadoebis gamoxatvis saSualebad qceula~
(edvard sepiri, `lingvistikis, rogorc mecnierebis, statusi~). ai, ratom
qvia ucxoel lingvistTa naSromebis erT saukeTeso krebuls ase ènebi
rogorc samyaros saxe~.
`mgzavris werilebis~ saanalizo monakveTis TiTqmis erTi gverdis sig-
rZeze figurirebs `sityva~ da èna~ viTarca mxatvruli saxeebi. movixmoT
teqsti (gamovtovebT zogierT frazas, ukve gaanalizebulT): `rogor Sevey-
rebi me Cems qveyanas da rogor Semeyreba igi me, vifiqre. ras vetyvi me Cems
qveyanas axals da ras metyvis igi me? vin icis: iqneb me Cemma qveyanam zurgi
Semomaqcios, rogorc ucxo niadagzed gadargulsa da aRzrdilsa? iqneba
zurgic ar Semomaqcios, iqneba mimiTvisos kideca, radganac CemSi mainc-da-
mainc Cemis qveynis dvritaa dadebuli. magram maSin ra vqna, rom Cemma qve-
yanam mamiyolos da miambos Tavis gulis-tkivili, Tavisi glovis dafaruli
mizezi, Tavisi imedi da uimedoba, da me ki, mis enas gadaCveulma, ver gavigo
misi ena, misi sityva? iqneba mimiRos kidec da, rogorc Tavisi Svili, gulze-
dac mimikras da xarbad damigdos yuri, magram me SeviZleb ki, rom mas RviZli
sityva vuTxra da im sityviT gulistkivili movurCino, davrdomili aRvad-
gino, unugeSos nugeSi movfino, mtirals cremli movwmindo, muSaks Sroma
gavuadvilo; ... da is TiTeuli naperwkali, romelic ar SeiZleba rom yovels
kacSi ara Jolavdes, erT did cecxlad Sevagrovo Cemis qveynis gaciebulis
gulis gasaTboblad~.
miuTiTeben, rom niWi enobrivi metyvelebisa `SesaZleblobaTa mwver-
vals aRwevs sityvakazmul literaturaSi~ (hugo Suhardti). yvela kul-
turuli eris mxatvruli literaturis dabadeba arsebiTad enis, viTarca
axali sinamdvilis warmomqmnelis, energeistul potencials daemyara. i.g.
herders uTqvams: `literatura aRmocenda enaSi da ena literaturaSi~.
enis filosofia eswrafvis SeaRwios sityvis saocari da mravalferovani
gamomsaxvelobiTi potencialis siRrmeSi. swored gamomsaxvelobiToba, sa-
xeobrioba aris enobrivi organizmis upirvelesi mSobeli da gamformebeli
da ara saxeldebis, aRniSvnis funqcia. amaze ityvis edv. sepiri: sinamdvilis
gagebis gzaze ena simbolur xelmZRvanelad SeiZleba miviCnioTo.
davakvirdeT. Cvens winaSea sityvieri xelovnebis didi niWiT damSvene-
buli mwerlis monologi mSobliuri enis madlsa da Zals rom eZebs da ar-
kvevs sakuTari TavisTvis, TanamedroveTa da momaval TaobaTagan Sesamec-
neblad. asec SeiZleba iTqvas: monologis gmiri qarTuli enaa, sityvaa. esaa
poeturi sityva sityvis Sesaxeb. moxmobil teqstSi, romelic wignis naxevar
128
gverds cotaTi aRemateba, sityvebi, èna~ da `sityva~ TxuTmetjer figu-

rirebs.
ènisa~ da `sityvis~ moxmobis yvela SemTxveva ki mxatvruli saxea, xa-
tia. rogorc mosalodnelia, es aris plastikuri formis mxatvruli saxee-
bi. ixateba mSoblis (mamulisa) da Svilis (mwerlis) urTierTobis sisaTuTiT
aRbeWdili suraTebi. `suraTebic~ ver daerqmeva maT; ufro swori iqneba
vTqvaT, es aris locvas miaxloebuli vibracia mamuliSvilisa da poetis
sulisa. `sityva~ da èna~, `vetyvi~ da `metyvis~ ukve monologis dasawyisSi
da merec ar aris am teqstSi mxolod masala mxatvruli saxisa. am sityvebis
yofiTi Tu socialuri mniSvneloba, swored imis kvalobaze, rom ena warmoq-
mnaa, energiaa, gadaizrdeba mxatvrul-saxeobriv (Tu simbolur) Sinaarsad
(edvard sepiri: `Cven SegviZlia ena miviCnioT xelmZRvanelad kulturis
gagebis gzaze~ (narkvevi `lingvistikis, rogorc mecnierebis, statusi~).
monologis dasawyisSivea aseTi. ucxoeTidan mobrunebuli Svilis gonebaSi
èrT ganuwyvetel grexilad~ qceula fiqrebi imis Sesaxeb, rogor `Seeyre-
ba~ igi mSobels da `rogor Seeyreba~ mSobeli mas; `ras vetyvi me Cems qveyanas
axals da ras metyvis igi me?~ oTxi wlis winaT Sedga saubari gamomSvidobe-
bisa (`yvarlis mTebs~). win aris Sexvedris sityva. Svils, viTarca `dvritas~
mSoblisa, eimedeba, rom mSobeli `miiTvisebs~. erTi ki afiqrebs: maSin ra qnas,
samSoblom rom ùambos Tavis gulis tkivili?...~ Svilma ki, mSoblis ènas ga-
daCveulma, ver gaigos misi ena, misi sityva~? e.i. yvelaferi, rac saTqmelia
da Sesasmeni, enaSia da eniT myofobs. arsebobs mSoblisa da Svilis, mamulisa
da mamuliSvilis urTierTobis RvTiT nakurTxi ena, romelsac ilia marTa-
li `RviZl sityvad~ naTlavs: `SevZleb ki, rom mas (samSoblos) RviZli sityva
vuTxra?!~ da kidev erTxel: `SeviZleb gasagonis RviZlis sityvis Tqmasa?...~
amgvari SinaarsiT dakvalianebuli metyvelebis unars Tu niWs ase gamoiTx-
ovs uflisagan basili didi (kesarieli): `mohmadlen Cuen mRviZare goneba da
gulis sityua keTili~.
wm. basili kesarielis `gulis sityva keTili~ da wm. ilia marTlis
`RviZli sityva~ erTgvari Sinaarsis da msgavsi formis saxeebia. `mgzavris
werilebis~ saanalizo monakveTSi avtori garkveviT ityvis: SevZleb sam-
Soblos `RviZli sityva~ vuTxra da gulistkivili movurCino?... `RviZli
sityva~ uSualod imave guls emsaxureba, romlis wamladac `gulis sityva
keTili~ yofila ganCinebuli. qarTuli ena, viTarca warmoqmnis unaris mqo-
ne energia, aseT xatsac Wvrets da usmens: `gulisxmiereba~. guli usmens da
exmianeba, gulive gvixmobs kidec. 1954 wels grigol robaqiZe ucxoeTidan
ase exmianeboda qarTvel axalgazrdebs: `mamulis guliT gixmobT SoreTi-
dan, axalgazrdebo!~. `guli~ 851-jer moixseneba Zveli aRTqmis furclebze
(s. averincevi). biblia adamianurobis yvelaze ufro Rrma da metyvel gamo-
xatulebad guls miiCnevs. ieremia winaswarmetyveli ki erTmaneTis igiveob-
129
rivad saxavs kacsa da guls: `Rrma ars guli ufros yovelTasa da kac ars~
(17, 19). `guli~ Turme `kacis~ nacvalsaxelia, kacobis tolfasia. `mgzavris
werilebis~ saanalizo monakveTis `RviZli sityva~ uSualod Sezrdilia
gulTan: SeviZleb `RviZli sityva vuTxra da gulistkivili movurCino?...~
iqve naTqvamia, rom mwerali modis samSobloSi Tavisi `qveynis gaciebulis
gulis gasaTboblad~. Semdgom ki vkiTxulobT: ìmis (mamulis) sityvasac da
enasac gavigeb, imitom, rom mamulis sityvas mamulis-Svili yurs ugdebs
gana marto yuriTa, guliTaca, romlisTvisac dumilic gasagonia~. dumi-
lic metyvelebs, Turme dumilis enac arsebobs, ena uRrmesi da uidumales
WeSmaritebaTa gamometyveli, romelTa mosaxelTeblad Cveulebrivi èna
daSvrebis~ amaod (rusTaveli). `brZnad metyueleba vecxli ars wmida, xo-
lo dumil oqro rCeuli~ (uTqvams solomon brZens). istoriulad asketu-
ri moRvaweobis erTob rafinirebul formad miiCneoda ìsixazmi~ RvTis
uzenaesobis dumilSi gancda. `geniosuri kalmis mosmad~ miaCnda ilia Wav-
WavaZes `vefxistyaosnis~ is epizodi, sadac sruli dumiliT mTavrdeba ta-
riel-nestanis pirveli paemani. dumilis-metyvelebis mSvenierebas mere Ta-
vad mimarTa iliam òTaraanT qvrivSi~ (mimarTa baraTaSvilma (`Cemi locva~),
muxran maWavarianma (`dumili rekavs~), tutCevma (`Silentium~).
qarTul eTnoss, qarTul enobriv cnobierebas gagonebis Cveulebrivi
organos (yuri) raobasa da unarze ZvelTaganve `dauSenebia~ araCveulebri-
vi Sinaarsis mosasmenis, gasagonis aRqmis unaris mqone warmonaqmni `gu-
lisyuri~. `gulisyuri~ sityva-saxea, saqmeSi Careulia esTetikuri impulsi.
aseT situaciaSi germanuli eTnosi ityvis `Sinagani yuri~.
h. g. gadamers movusminoT: `Sinagani yuri~ moixelTebs idealur enob-
riv saxes iseT raRacas, romlis gagonebac SeuZlebelia. xom SeuZlebels
iTxovs adamianis xmisagan idealuri enobrivi xati xom swored amaSia li-
teraturuli teqstis arsebobis specifika~ (`filosofia da literatura~).
imave òTaraanT qvrivSi~ wm. ilia marTali tol-sworobis niSans svams
`gulsa~ da `madls~ Soris. arCili eubneba kesos: `guli... guli, ese igi is mad-
li, rac enas da xels unda asaqmebdes, marTla rom aRar aris, an aris da da-
munjebulia, dayruebulia... guli ra aris? marto erTi kaci rom yofiliyo
qveyanazed, gulic ar iqneboda. guli madlia, da madli marto ors Sua saq-
mobs, orni mainc unda iyvnen, rom madli mohxdes, imitom, rom madli erTisa-
gan gawirvaa da meorisagan Sewirva erTsa da imave dros~. rogorc vxedavT,
am pasaJis mixedviTac, gulic metyvelia da madlic mRaRadebelia. arCili
swored imaze wuxs, rom erTic da meorec `damunjebulia, dayruebulia~
(arc `munjoba~ da arc `yruoba~ ar aris aq mxolod masala raRac sagnobri-
vi, socialuri, yofiTi sinamdvilis sauwyeblad; zneobriv-sulier faseu-
lobaTa xatebia). xolo es faseulobani rom qristianuli moralis qresto-
maTiuli mcnebebia, esec xom cxadia. humboldtis is fraza gavixsenoT, rom
RvTisaken mimarTul guliswadils SemarTebas ena aniWebs. ase rom, wm. ilia
130
marTlis sja enis, mamulisa da mamuliSvilobis Sesaxeb mSobliur enaze gav-

liT sarwmunoebisaken miemarTeba. amasTan dakavSirebiT gavixsenebT, rom
maqs miulers aqvs gamokvleva aseTi saxeldebiT `sityvidan sarwmunoebi-
saken~ (krebuli ènebi rogorc samyaros saxe~).
wm. ilia marTlis sjani `mgzavris werilebisa~ da òTaraanT qvrivis~ am
fragmentebSi dedaenis erTgvar Teoriadac warmogvidgeba; oRond igi mowo-
debulia ara Teoriul-logikuri gansjis formiT, aramed TviT ena da sti-
li am RaRadisisa Zaldautaneblad gvkarnaxobs lingvistur definicias. aq
erovnuli xasiaTis da cnobierebis zneobrivi sijansaRis da TviTkmari fa-
seulobis gamocxadebacaa. oRond erovnuli mowodebulia tendenciurobis
gareSe da ise rafinirebulia, rom bunebrivad migvaqcevs im zogadqristia-
nuli religiur-filosofiuri azrisaken, rom `pirveliTgan iyo sityva~.
wminda ilia marTali dabejiTebiT gvmoZRvravs, rom sivrce da bune-
ba im mxarisa, sadac ibadeba da izrdeba adamiani, erTob mniSvnelovani sis-
xlZarRvia eTnikuri raobis dasakvalianeblad. cxovelmyofeloba konkre-
tuli miwa-wylis da eTnosis individualobisa RvTisagan boZebuli madlia,
raTa zogadsakacobrio idealebs mivadgaT kibe; Zalian maRali kibec miwas
unda daebjinos. `zeca miwidan iwyeba~ (o. WilaZe). aseT fiqrebs aRZravs ili-
as leqsi `yvarlis mTebs~.
didi dakvirveba ar sWirdeba imis SemCnevas, rom `yvarlis mTebis~ oci
wlis avtoris erovnul cnobierebas erTob cxovelmyofeli tvifari aCnia
samSoblos miwa-wylis amaRlebuli gancdisa. samSoblos mTebi lirikuli
gmiris `gulTan~ `bunebiTaa SeuRlebuli~; eamayeba, rom am `mTebs Soris da-
badebula~, am `bunebis Svilia~, es miwa-wyali malamod scxebia, raTa `qar-
Tvlad gazrdiliyo~. jer kidev `yrmas~ intuiciiT ganucdia am mTebis sidi-
ade.
narkvevSi `saqarTvelos kosmosofia~ giorgi gaCevi ityvis: ìntuici-
is umTavresi migneba mTebs ukavSirdeba. saqarTvelo mijaWvulia mTebze.
mTebSia qarTvelebis xsnac da satanjvelic. saqme is aris, rom mTebma maT na-
xevari zeca waarTva~ (vaJa-fSavelac ase ityvis mTebze: ìmaT CaunTqam qveya-
na~). ras unda niSnavdes `naxevari cis warTmeva?~ sityva `ca~, Tavisi konkre-
tul-sagnobrivi mniSvnelobis garda, xom xSirad gadataniTi, poeturi az-
riT ixmareba, uflis samyofelze Tu RvTaebrivze mianiSnebs (`mamao Cveno,
romeli xar caTa Sina~; avTandili rostevanze etyvis tariels: `patroni,
Cemi gamzrdeli... mSobluri, tkbili, mowyale, ca wyalobisa mToveli~; ilia:
`me ca mniSnavs da eri mzrdis~).
`naxevari cis warTmeva~ imas unda mianiSnebdes, rom RvTis sidiadis da
Zlevamosilebis intuitur-poeturi Wvreta qarTvelis cnobierebaSi, gar-
kveulwilad, zecisken atyorcnili mTebis amaRlebulobis, SemarTebisa da
idumalebis gancdas Sexorcebia.
131
Zveli aRTqmiseuli tradicia mTebSi xedavs RvTis daurRveveli si-

marTlis simbolos: `simarTleni Senni viTarca mTani, RmerTo...~ (fsalm.
35,7). RvTaebrivi gamocxadebis adgili bibliaSi upiratesad aris qore-
bis mTa. moses aq ecxadeba ufali: `movida mTasa mas RmrTisa qorebs~. TviT
RmerTi mianiSnebs moses: àdgili ege, romelsa Sen sdga, queyana wmida ars~
(gamosl. 3, 1-5). raTa ezekiels ierusalimi aCvenos, RmerTs igi eqstatiur
xilvaSi gadahyavs `Zalian maRal mTaze~ (ezek. 40, 2). aRmarTulan ra dedami-
widan maRla, mTebi TiTqos RmerTTan Sexvedras moaswaveben, Zlevamosile-
bis simbolod warmogvidgebian. adamianebi midian, mTebi dganan; `dganan da
elian. usazRvroa mTebis molodini: usazRvro zRvada sdgas imaT gulSi...~
(vaJa-fSavelas `mTani maRalni~). poema `baxtrionSi~ mTebi `cis gul-mkerds
hkocnian~.
samSoblos siyvarulis Tema wminda ilia marTlis leqsSi erTob ara-
ordinalurad aris gaSlili. sja yvarlis mTebze aq saqarTvelos miwa-wylis
zogadi geografiuli iersaxis, saerTo monaxazis yvelaze TvalSisacemi
Strixis siRrmiseuli azris intuitur-poetur wvdomasa da gaxsna-gamocxa-
debas emsaxureba. mTebi aRiqmeba viTarca xerxemali saqarTvelos miwa-wyli-
sa. uxsovari droidan am mTebsa da xeobebSi fexadgmuli eTnosi am sivrces
RvTaebriv sulad racxda. es eTnosi am sivrceSi Turme `Cadga viT Zelqva
rkinis fesvebiT~ (g. leoniZe).
sxvagvari fesvebiT qarTveloba am sivrceSi fexs ver moikidebda. es
mTebi, mzisken rom izidebian, cis Tavans rom ebjinebian, Zlevamosilebisa
da amaRlebulobis sunTqvas agrZnobineben am miwa-wylis mkvidrT, ancvif-
reben da Tavisuflebis STagonebiT avseben; TiTqos gvaSineben kidec, rad-
gan stiqionur ZalTa azvirTebis suraTebs mogvivlenen; dedamiwis gulSi
dagrovil-dakumSuli energia TiTqos aq amoxeTqavs, mTebis mwvervalebidan
gadmoiRvreba; aq dawyvets artaxebs, `sadac Rrubelni ver hbedaven SiSiT
srbolasa~ (`mTa-qariSxlebisa~, `mTa-zecisa da miwis kavSiri~, ityvis T.
dombarti zemoT dasaxelebul wignSi). magram amgvari SiSis gancdac zedro-
ul-zesivrculisaken, gamouTqmelisaken migvaqcevs, krZalviTa da sasoebiT
gvavsebs. TviT poets movusminoT:
maxsovs yrma viyav, Zlivs mosuli gons da cnobasa,
ros sidiade Tqveni mgvrida kankals, JrJolasa...
igi ar iyo SiSis JrJola, SiSis kankali,
igi ar iyo Zvra gulisa mfrTxali da mxdali.
me TrTolviT vWvretdi laJvard cazed Tqvensa simaRles
da Sevnatrodi ymawvilurad Tqvens zemo mxares;
sadac Rrubelni ver hbedaven SiSiT srbolasa,
sadac ismendiT amayada grigalT qrolasa,
sadac weroTa qaravani, cas daRupuli,
Tqven TavTan iyo TiTqmis Zliv-Zliv gasworebuli,
132
iq me vnatrobdi ymawvil yrmobis simartiviTa,

frenas da tantals Tqvens saSinel grigaliviTa.
vnatrobdi xolme, rom vexvio subuqsa qarsa,
an Tavisufal arwivisa Zliersa frTasa,
rom aRmovfrinde da Sevexo Tqvens amay Tavsa.
roca hRmuodnen xevSi mZvifrni sastikni qarni,
viTar mrisxane daWril lomTa saSiSni xmani,
im xmebSi vgrZnobdi me raRacas nacnobs, mSobliurs.
aw momwons Tavi, megobrebo, rom dabadeba
Tqven Sorisa mxvda, bunebisa Tqveni var Svili,
grigalTa, mexTa, quxilT Soris qarTvlad gazrdili.
am leqsSi, saTauridanve mTebisaken rom miapyrobs Cvens sulier mze-

ras, TiTqmis ar aris iseTi mxatvruli saxe mSvenierebis esTetikuri katego-
riis nimuSad rom miviCnevdiT. esTetikuris Zlieri gancda, mxatvruli xib-
li ZiriTadad amaRlebulis esTetikur kategoriazea damyarebuli. aq gan-
saxierebuli sagnebisa da movlenebis Sinagani idealuri faseuloba, umetes
SemTxvevaSi, ver eteva gamosaxvis realur formebSi. amgvari gansaxierebis
kvalobaze iyo, rom kanti (`msjelobis unaris kritika~) da Sileri (àmaRle-
bulis Sesaxeb~) erTmaneTs upirispirebdnen `mSveniers~ da àmaRlebuls~,
upiratesobas aniWebdnen amaRlebulis esTetikas. mSvenierSi, miuTiTebdnen
isini, erTob Rrma Sinaarsi Tu ideac dasazRvrulia formiT, eteva, amoiwu-
reba formiT. amaRlebulis arsi dausazRvrelobaSi iZireba; is, riskenac
amaRlebulis esTetika gvixmobs, Wvretisa da warmosaxvis adamianur unars
aRemateba; amaRlebulis xati usasrulobisaken migvaswrafebs, STagonebiT
gvavsebs, Tavisuflebis niWs aRviZebs.
wminda ilia marTlis leqsi arsebiTad amaRlebulis esTetikiT gvxib-
lavs. yvarlis mTebis sivrce usasrulobis, STagonebisa da Tavisuflebis
im suliskveTebiTaa amovsebuli, romelic am miwa-wylis mkvidrTa sulebs
uSurvelad asazrdoebs.
`yvarlis mTebis~ dasawyisSive SeimCneva, rom avtoris STagoneba amaR-
lebulis esTetikiTaa aRZruli:
maxsovs yrma viyav, Zlivs mosuli gons da cnobasa,
ros sidiade Tqveni mgvrida kankals, JrJolasa...
sidiadis da miuwvdomlis, idumalis zeciuri sauflo uxmobs liri-

kul gmirs da isic romantikuli SemarTebiT eltvis `zenaarT samyofs~. igi
`TrTolviT Wvrets laJvard caze~ mTebis `simaRles~, `zemo mxares~, `sadac
Rrubelni ver hbedaven SiSiT srbolasa~; am simaRleebs `weroTa qaravani
Zliv-Zliv gasworebia~; `ymawvil-yrmobis simartives~ am simaRleze arwivis
frTebiT afrena da bumberazebis àmay TavTan Sexeba~ unatria. Turme iqaur
xeobebSi `sastikni qarni~ daWril lomTa~ xmiT Rmuian.
133
`sastik qarTa~ daWril lomisebr Rmuilis garemoSi, Tavisufal arwiv-

Ta qrolvis saufloSi, daudgromeli moZraobisa da moqmedebis im sivrce-
Si, `laJvard caTa~ siaxloves rom ar cxreba, Casaxula, gamoCekila da da-
purebula qarTvelTa jiSi. es garemoa lirikuli gmirisaTvis `mSobliuri~,
mTebs, viTarca `megobrebs~, ise Seesityveba: àw momwons Tavi, rom dabadeba
Tqvens Sorisa mxvda, bunebisa Tqveni var Svili, grigalTa, mexTa, quxilT
Soris qarTvlad gazrdili~. WeSmarit qarTvelad Turme amgvar miwa-wyalze
aRzrda da am sivrceSi mfeTqavi suliT sunTqva gvxdis. am striqonebSi Rvi-
vis paTosi moZraobisa, WirTTmenisa da simtkicisa, sabolood, Tavisuf-
lebisaTvis muxlCauxreli brZolis poeturi apologia (SevadaroT: puSki-
nisaTvis ` ~; `, !~ (leqsi ` ~),
` ~ (poema `~).
* * *
es suliskveTeba, samSoblos miwa-wylis Sinagani pulsis miyuradebiT
da garegnobis nakvTianobiT rom gveufleba, kidev erTxel didebulad gaxmi-
andeba meoce saukuneSi. vgulisxmobT giorgi leoniZis lirikul Sedevrs sa-
gulisxmo saTauriT `mTebi~. am leqsSi sulis SemZvrel suraTebadaa gacocx-
lebuli, Tu rogor cdilobdnen mtrebi, amoeZirkvaT mSobel miwas `rkinis
fesvebiT~ CaWidebuli qarTuli eTnosi, `vefxvis jiSi da xmlis jiSi~.
dagvwves, dagvdages da ver waiRes

Tavisuflebis amayi suli.
igi gadurCa borkils da cixes,
is mTebSi iyo gadaxiznuli!
mTebo, ver hklaven am suls omebi,
da Tu mosTxrian, amohbzaraven,
Tqven daibRavlebT, rogorc lomebi,
rodesac Zu loms lekvs mohparaven!
am leqsSic is azria gatarebuli, rom Tavisuflebisa da mamulis siyva-

rulis RvTaebrivi niWi, amaRlebulobis naTeli mTebidan efineboda qarTve-
lobas, WirTaTmenis ZalisxmevisaTvis uTbobda guls. Tavisuflebis niWs,
gveubneba poeti, lomebrivi buneba awovebs ZuZus, Tavisuflebis `moTxra~
lomobis sikvdilia. Cven gvgonia, rom lomis xati leqsSi Tavisuflebis
sulze mimaniSnebeli simboloa; mTebSi, orive leqsis mixedviT (iliasa da g.
leoniZisa), `lomis Rmuilia~, Tavisuflebis suli xmianobs. ilia ki ambobs:
ìm xmebSi vgrZnobdi me raRacas nacnobs, mSobliurs... grigalTa, mexTa, qu-
xilT Soris qarTvlad gazrdili~ (qarTvelad am xmam gamzardao).
134
* * *
vaJa fSavelas esTetikuri koncefciis mixedviT, arsTa gamriges TviT
saqarTvelos miwa-wyali, buneba daujildoebia am eTnosis mier aSenebuli
qveynis Wirisuflobis cnobierebiT. grigol robaqiZe ambobs: `cnobiere-
ba poetisa Tavis saxes hqmnis bunebaSi da amiT mas asulierebs, da bunebis
asarkvaSi qmnili saxe cnobierebisa xdeba simbolo maTi cnobierebis da
bunebis erTianobisa~. poema `baxtrionSi~ aseTi epizodia: laSaris xatSi
Tavmoyrili fSavel-xevsurni salaSqrod emzadebian. laSqars Tavs wamoad-
ga cxenze amxedrebuli lela, `wvermaxvi SubiT~ SeiaraRebuli. qali iTxovs,
laSqarSi miiRon, TaTrebisagan daxocili Zmebis sisxlis aReba swadia. uari
uTxres, `kacCi dedakacs ra undao~.
wavida gul-CaTeTqvili,
mivalis Zali-Zalada.
qalis qviTinsa mduRares
mTani iweren mkerdzeda;
cremliT atirdnen wyaroni,
Camomdinarni gverdzeda;
daberebula pirimze,
kuzi etyoba welzda...
ocneba tanjuli qveynis
qviTinebs mTisa wverzeda.
aq Cven gvesaubreba didi poeti da vizioneri, aTaswleulebis siRrme-

Si ocnebiT gadasaxlebuli kaci, Sinagani xedvisa da smenis didi niWiT da-
jildoebuli, romlis suli da goni jer ar daRlila analitikuri azrov-
nebis labirinTebSi xetialiT. misi metyveleba aris wyarosTvaliviT anka-
ra, locvasacviT Tbili da im madliT aRbeWdili, romelsac Zveli berZnebi
eTikur-esTetikur kategoriad miiCnevdnen `he aplotes~, Zveli qarTveli
mwerlebi ki `siwrfoebas~ uwodebdnen. amgvari ubraloebis kvalobaze, g.
robaqiZe `vaJas engadiSi~ vaJas ase moixseniebs: `bunebis Suagulidan mzi-
rali, kaci pirvandeli~ amgvari stili, miuTiTebs g. robaqiZe, niSneulia
firosmanisaTvis: `mTavari motivi firosmanisa aris qarTuli `miwa~, me ar
SemiZlia meore saxeli davasaxelo, garda vaJa fSavelasi, romelsac aseTi
siZlieriT egrZnos miwis `dedoba~ (`niko firosmani~). qarTuli eTnosisa da
misi miwa-wylis sisxlxorceul siaxlovezea aq saubari.
es suraTi vaJas SemoqmedebisaTvis niSneuli miTosuri xedvisa Tu xil-
vis nimuSia. miTosuria, magram ar aris miTosi. realurSi idealuris Ziebis
paTosis RvTaebrivi niWiT STagonebuli vaJa am amocanis xorcSesxmisaTvis
gadasaxldeba (da gadagvasaxlebs) miTosis samyaroSi, esTetikuri Tvalsaz-
risiT iyenebs am samyarosaTvis niSneul mxatvrul-saxeobriv sistemas. am
sistemas ki axasiaTebs bunebis gaadamianureba, kosmosis fragmentebis ga-
suliereba. `literaturis msgavsad, miTebi wilnayaria Sinaarsobriv xato-
135
vanebasTan: iqac da aqac idea ganuyofel mTlianobaSia grZnobad saxesTan.

magram miTebi gaucnobiereblad xatovania da es ganasxvavebs mas literatu-
ruli Semoqmedebisagan. miTi refleqsiamdeli (gaazrebisa da gacnobierebis
Jamamdeli. g.f.) koleqtiuri Semoqmedebis nayofia, maSin, roca literatu-
risaTvis ganmsazRvreli momentia swored avtoris subieqturi refleqsia~,
e.i. sakuTari azri, TvalTaxedva. `miTologia pirvandeli poeziaa~ (s. averin-
cevi, `miTebi~). aseTia igi ara mxolod genetikurad, aramed sinamdvilis gan-
saxierebis stiliT, maneriT. vaJas im nawarmoebSi, bunebis Temas rom exeba,
dakvirvebuli mzera kargad grZnobs avtoris subieqtur profils, wyalgam-
yofs sagansa da mis xats Soris, nivTsa da sityvas Soris (vaJas subieqturi
`me~, viTarca mwerlisa da Semoqmedisa, rom sruliad gamokveTilia, gamoyo-
filia koleqtiuri cnobierebisagan, amaze sja, ra Tqma unda, zedmetia, mag-
ram erT striqons mainc movixmob leqsidan `Cemis kacobis gvirgvino~: àr
miRalato, ocnebav, mnaxodi male-maleo~).
ras niSnavs, rom `miTologia pirvandeli poeziaa~? imas, rom miTisaT-
vis niSneuli xedvac (rogorc ukve iTqva) xatovania, idea mxatvruli saxiTaa
formirebuli, niSani, xati ganuyofelia imasTan, ris xaticaa (esTetikuri
Segneba araa diferencirebuli saganT samyarosagan). istoriis uadresi eta-
pis koleqtiuri cnobiereba gvesityveba miTidan da amitomaa miTosuri mxat-
vruli saxe gamWvirvale, bavSvuri ubraloebiT aris aRbeWdili da `bunebis
Suagulidan mzirali~; amitomaa igi `pirvandeli poezia~. da swored imis
kvalobaze, rom kacobriobis istoriis uadresi etapi miTSi xorcSesxmuli
mSvenierebis, poeziis eniT gvesityveba, SeiZleba vTqvaT, rom `miTologia
pirvandeli poeziaa~. s. averincevis es Rrmaazrovani sja ki ukeT gagvagebi-
nebs h. gadameris aseve Rrmaazrovan Tvalsazriss: `poezia aris pirvandeli
ena kacobriobisa~. xolo ìs sawyisi, romelic gonebis SemoqmedebiT Zalebs
moZraobaSi moiyvans da poetur saxeebsac kvebavs, aris enis pirvandeli po-
ezia~. Turme `Sopenhauers miaCnda, rom namdvili leqsi odiTganve winaswar-
moswavebulia da Casaxulia enis stiqiaSi~ (viaCeslav ivanovi, `Cveni ena~).
Segneba imisa, rom mSobliuri miwa-wylis silamaze uzenaesi mSveniere-
bis xorcSesxmul xatad da madladaa boZebuli RvTisganve da zneobriv mova-
leobasac gvakisrebs, gacnobierebulia da amkobs poema `baxtrionis~ gmirs
luxums. gavixsenoT: lela rom laSqarSi ar miiRes, gawbilebul qals kvi-
ria wamoewia gzaze. isini dawinaurdnen, raTa laSqris misvlamde rogorme
SeeRwiaT cixeSi. mogvianebiT SeamCnies kvirias gauCinareba. zogierTs cu-
dad eniSna es ambavi. `naTrev kacia, ar iyos Ralatianio~. laSqarSi rom eWvma
Zala moica, luxumma xma aRimaRla:
kacno, ras ambobT netara?
rad hgrexT diacebr Worebsa?...
rad ar gahxednebT, briyvebo,
Cvenis samSoblos gorebsa?...
136
egre muxTalad Ralati;

mtrisa salxenad Zmebisa
SinaiT gamotyueba?!
srul sicruvea, nu ityviT...
`samSoblos gorebi~ vaJa-fSavelas personaJebis cnobierebasTan, ka-

cobasTan, iseve arian Sexorcebulni, rogorc yvarlis mTebs `Ralian-bara-
qiani~ ZuZu uwovebiaT didi ilia WavWavaZisaTvis. mTebs vaJa bunebis qmnile-
baTa gvirgvinad racxs:
netav bunebis qmnileba
sxva maT ra Saedareba...
miwac tkbilia mSobluri,
guls rom eyreba fxviera.
ukve wminda werilis furclebzea sja RmerTis, adamianisa da miwis ur-

TierTmimarTebaze: `ca cad uflisaTvis, xolo queyana misca adamis ZeT~
(fsalm. 111, 24). magram boZebis aqti Rrmad Sinaarsiania, damavaldebelia:
`movedin sufeva Seni, iyavn neba Seni, viTarca caTa Sina, eg re ca qu e ya na-
sa ze da~ (maTe, 6, 10). ufalma adamiani miwisagan gamoZerwa, sicocxle STa-
bera gamoZerwils da ando, raTa miwa marto xorcieli arsebobisaTvis ki ar
hqonoda, aramed miwis wiaRSi Camarxul madlTa siuxviT baRnarad eqcia igi
(rusTaveli: `Cven kacTa mogvca qveyana, gvaqvs uTvalavi feriTa~).
didi RvTismetyveli vladimer loski ganmartavs: `RmerTma imisTvis
Seqmna samyaro, raTa adamiani srulyofdes mas da adamianic Tavisi Sinaga-
ni niWiT Seicnobs cocxal arsebebs, SeaRwevs maTSi da ganagebs bunebiseul
simdidres... da miwa Tavis pirovnul hipostasur sazriss iZens adamianSi.
samyarosaTvis adamiani aris wyaloba da sasoeba RmerTTan SesaerTeblad~
(`dogmaturi RvTismetyveleba~).
vaJa-fSavelas erT leqss hqvia `mgosans~. poeziis msaxurT, upirvele-
sad, amas avalebs poeti: `guls Caiyene sis xla da Cveni qveyana mTi a ni~.
is sivrce, miwa-wyali, sadac davibadeT da gavizardeT, sicocxlisaT-
vis did Zalasa da madls imarxavs; dauSreteli ZuZua Cveni zneobrivi da in-
teleqtualuri potencialisaTvis, sulieri sijansaRisaTvis. rogor Cnde-
ba sivrciTi kavSiris intimuri xasiaTi? bunebis silamazisa da simdidris
garda, saqmeSi xSirad miTiuri da subieqturi gancdebic ereva, dauviwyari
kavSirebiT rom migvacileben cxovrebis gzaze. xSirad es kavSirebi da aso-
ciaciebi erTob mniSvnelovania eTnikuri identifikaciisaTvis, vidre am
teritoriaze cxovreba an misi gankargva. ès is adgilia, romelsac mivekuT-
vnebiT. xSirad es aris sakraluri miwa, Cvens mama-papaTa, rjulmdebelTa, me-
feTa, brZenkacTa, poetTa da mRvdelmsaxurTa miwa, da amitom aris is Cveni
samSoblo. Cven iseve vekuTvniT mas, rogorc is Cven gvekuTvnis~ (entoni d.
smiTi, `nacionaluri identoba~). msgavs TvalTaxedvas gvTavazobs rafiel
137
erisTavi leqsSi `samSoblo xevsurisa~.

Zvel aRTqmaSi vkiTxulobT: nayamani, aramis mefis sardali, damaskos
midis da imisaTvis, raTa iq sxva RmerTebs ar Seswiros msxverpli, Tan miaqvs
mcire raodenobis miwa israelisa (4 mefeTa, 5, 17).
* * *
P.S. qarTvelTa gadajiSebis imgvari safrTxe, ragvarzedac didi ilia

wuxda, saqarTvelos xSirad emuqreboda. mecxramete da meoce saukuneebis
TiTqmis mTel sigrZeze ruseTi yovelgvar Rones xmarobda qarTvelobis
asimilaciisaTvis. am veragobis asacileblad ibrZodnen eris saukeTeso Svi-
lebi. erT-erTi maTgani iyo msoflio saxelis mecnieri, Tbilisis univer-
sitetis profesori grigol wereTeli. movixmobT misi saubris ramdenime
fragments (saubari mimdinareobda orTaWalis cixeSi. 1939 wels komunis-
tebma mecnieri sikvdiliT dasajes. Canaweris ramdenime fragmenti gamoita-
na Jurnalistma aleqsandre maxaraZem).
ai, ramdenime fraza am saubridan: èrs ezrdeba sakacobrio ideebiT
yalbad SeiaraRebuli, sinamdvileSi ki yoveldRiur pirad keTildReobaze
gadareuli da sakuTari eris genetikuri TavisTavadobis uaryofiT Rrmad
gamsWvaluli nihilisturi sazogadoeba. igi mTlianad daarRvevs da mSvi-
dobianad moZalebul zRvaSi SeumCnevlad gaadnobs Tavisi mcirericxovani,
magram metad Taviseburi, swored sakacobrio mniSvnelobiT saintereso da
sasargeblo eris arsebobis sayrdens qarTveli xalxis genetikur xelSeu-
xeblobas, da gadaaqcevs mas saxelwodebiT qarTul, magram arsiT, sisxliT,
jiSiT, TvisebiT da miswrafebebiT kosmopolitur konglomeratad, saerTo-
sakacobrio humanizmis momizezebiT... swored erTa nairgvarobasa da TviT-
myofadobis nairferovnebaSia sicocxlis azri da silamaze~.
literatura:
1. axali aRTqumai uflisa Cuenisa ieso qristesi, daibeWda uwmindesisa

da unetaresis, sruliad saqarTvelos kaTolikos-patriarqis ilia II
brZanebiTa da locva-kurTxeviT, saqarTvelos sapatriarqos gamom-
cemloba, Tb., 1995.
2. Edward Sapir. Selected Writings in Language, Culture and Personality. Berkeley: University
of California Press.1999.
3. W. fon Humboldt. On Language, On the Diversity of Human Language Construction and its
Influence on the Mental Development of the Human Species. Edited by Michael Losonsky,
CUP 1999.
4. Paul Johannes Tillich. Systematic Theology, University of Chicago Press, (2 volume),1961.
138
5. . . , . .: , 1991.
6. . . .: ,
1977.
7. . // . . ., 1918.
8. . . : . . .
.: , 1995.
9. benjamen uorfi, `qcevisa da azrovnebis mimarTeba enisadmi~, krebulSi
ènebi rogorc samyaros saxe, Tb., 2006.
10. m. haidegeri. `gza enisaken,~Tb., 1992.
11. entoni d. smiTi. nacionaluri identoba; Tb., 2000. mTargmneli
l. patariZe.
12. vladimer loski. dogmaturi RvTismetyveleba, Tb., 2010.
13. `wmida grigol xanZTeli~, Tb., 2006.
14. revaz siraZe, Zveli qarTuli literaturis istoria. Tb., 2005.
15. Tamaz Cxenkeli. mSvenieri mZlevari, Tb., 1987.
16. s. ratiani, sekularizacia da qarTveli eris dabadeba; krebulSi `qarTveli
eris dabadeba~, 2009.
17. guram ramiSvili, enis energeistuli Teoriis sakiTxebi. Tb., 1972.
18. guram ramiSvili, dedaenis Teoria. Tb., 1981.
19. avTandil arabuli, qarTuli metyvelebis kultura, Tb., 2007.
20. aleqsandre maxaraZe. J. `raeo~, #4, 2000.
21. aleqsandre maxaraZe. J. `saistorio moambe~, #73-74, 2002.
GRIVER PARULAVA
Georgian Language, Literature and Faith, Native Land and the Georgians
Summary
The phenomenon of language is naturally connected with the essence and origin of nation.
The essential sign of nationality, its heart and soul is language. Each language is marked by
many centuries cultural activity. The article presents a critical analysis of those conceptions
according to which the only function of language is verbal communication. Language has its
own spiritual value. It has its own aim in itself; it is a vehicle of nation, national idea and world
outlook.
139
Without language there could not exist the act of belief, religious experience. The verity
of language stands among ascetic virtues that lead to the highest spiritual heights. In this context
the verity of language is a sign of spiritual-intellectual energy accumulated in the depths of
the Georgian language.
The article argues that from the early Middle Ages Georgian has successfully expressed
religious, philosophical and aesthetic ideas. From the very beginning, the language, literature,
faith, beauty and the richness of Georgia made Georgians believe in their identity.
The individual is always connected with a whole, with that of his nation, of the race
to which the latter belongs, and of the entire species. From whatever aspect one may look at
it, his life is necessarily tied to sociality, and here, too, as we have already seen earlier in a
similar case, the outer subordinate viewpoint and the inner superior one lead to the same point.
In the merely vegetative existence, as it were, of man on the soil, the individuals need for
assistance drives him to combine with others, and calls for understanding through language,
so that common undertakings may be possible. But mental cultivation, even in the loneliest
seclusion of temperament, is equally possible only through language, and the latter requires to
be directed to an external being that understands it. The articulate sound is torn from the breast,
to awaken in another individual an echo returning to the ear. Man thereby at once discovers
that around him there are beings having the same inner needs, and thus capable of meeting the
manifold longing that resides in his feelings. For the intimation of totality, and the endeavour
towards it, are given immediately with the sense of individuality, and gather strength in the same
degree as the latter is sharpened, since every individual bears within him the collective essence
of man, though only on a single line of development. Nor do we even have the remotest inkling
of another as an individual consciousness. But this endeavour, and the seed of indelible longing
implanted in us by the concept of humanity itself, will not let the conviction perish, that separate
individuality as such is merely an appearance of the conditioned existence of a spiritual being.
If language reveals character and spiritual energy of a nation, if language is not made, or done,
or created, but in itself is a doer, or a creator (Humboldt), it could be argued that literature as
such in general, and Georgian literature, in particular, has grown and developed from internal
energetic potential of the Georgian language.
The article deals with a problem of criterion of an internal border. It is initially different
from external natural border of country. Instead of mountains and rivers, internal-natural
border is language. There exist varieties of tribal speech e.g. Megrelian and Svan; dialects
and patois are not used as the criterion of board, but common sociological phenomenon, that is
Literary Georgian, which is overwhelming and inner; where the Georgian language sounds, there
is Georgia. The elevated stage of Georgian consciousness reveals itself when the precondition
of spiritual existence of the Georgian nation has been found. It is a definition of Georgia as a
state. By everywhere praying, Georgian connects with Lord; as prayers are delivered in the
Georgian language, everybody who prays is inherently united in a big community which is
called the whole Georgia.
Georgian word is gifted by divine strength. The impression of this power penetrates into
140
each member of the community. National consciousness is formed in that process. It is a tool
which makes an ethnos into nation. (Native Language Theory) Concepts of language and
creed serve as undivided wholeness to the national identity of Georgians and the idea of united
Georgia, aspiration for God, approaching the Truth, brings man to liberty.
The birth of literature of each cultural nation, is based on the energetic potential of
language, as a creator of a new reality.
Actually, every attempt of constructing one unique universal language, which would
become the only language for every nation of our planet, has failed.
Nowadays, inspired by the achievements of modern industrial technologies and rootless
internalization, some people believe that in the future only several languages will serve all
peoples and nations participating in the globalization process. However, the Idea and the Beauty
of life lies in the multitude and identity of nations and their languages.
141
Teologiur-filosofiuri variaciebi
Tanamedroveobaze
THEOLOGICAL-PHILOSOPHICAL VARIATIONS ON
CONTEMPORARITY
JOE PILOTTA
Rapping Confucius: Chinas Transitional Identities
You are a foreigner.

You will not understand China if you are not Chinese.
Simple statements form the boundaries and become a reflexive mechanism to maintain
and preserve, enhance the guanxi system. Enhance power the only way to know China is with
a guide: perhaps a Virgil. To have a better chance than Virgil is to have a godfather, many god-
fathers; that is what I have had over the last 23 years.
Bound and unbound, just draw a distinction, these are the words of Luhmann and
Spencer Brown. The recently crossed threshold into this new century is a very particular bo-
undary. Without a threshold we could not cross in both directions. Maybe thresholds can only
exist as a consequence of hesitations.
There are two stark revelations of modernity. One is the discovery of the self that says
I before the named subjects. There is also the discovery of radical contingency that affects
the order of things. Modern subject appears as a being looking for its place in a restless world
according to law and it can no longer act as a subject of singular rationality. Our modern day
distinction of the politics of same and of another is backed by dialectical whole to see things in
the vision of western philosophy the other and the foreigner or strange are two different things.
Strangers of a guest as opposed to another language, another culture, strangeness of the opposite
sex and other states of strangeness a reunion is posited of the self in its IPSE and which cannot
be confused with the same as IDEM which is discerned by a third party.
The origin of I-you-here-now it is not at all related to elements and general classes of me-
aning. But occasional or demonstrative words are referred to the place of speaking a place that
opens up fields of experience language in action before it can be made subject to determination
of place. If the ability to be different or with the abilities to act differently is seen in a larger or
smaller kind of arbitrariness in this interpretation calls for the opposite of necessity with respect
to a legitimacy claim. We are led to a conflict often between relativism and universal.
The self-bounding, bounds itself beyond, that which bounds itself a result of an act of
bounding. This is not an event of a third party that separates one thing from another without
142
joi pilota _ konfucis garepeba: CineTis tradiciuli identobebi
involvement in the separation itself. Think of the difference of nearness and remoteness in time
and space, and in the distinctions here and there, now and then. Think of professional culture
and of the boundaries of normalization separating health from illness, the blameless from the
criminal, the insider from the outsider: who ever strives to one of either states or feels oneself
belonging to one or both domains will find oneself on only one side of the threshold. Such is
the case where the sphere of owness is confronted with the foreign, which are cross-border
experiences and also cross-personal experiences. These considerations go back to the formation
of a double nature of the bounding implications of separating off from something and the impli-
cations of bounding in and bounding out.
The active creating of a boundary takes place in a zero-point which lies neither at this
nor the other side of the boundary. The acting boundary possesses neither a definable thing nor
nothing as without this boundary there would not be this nor that or the other. The self-reference
of boundaries lies in its withdrawal, without regard to self-referentiality. This self is neither the
veiled subject of a personal act of bounding nor the result of someone elses activity; but within
the act of bounding its shape stands out as a gap inside separating itself from an outside, thus
produces (preferences) in that difference. Its separation is the marked side from which separates
itself remains unmarked. (Spencer-Brown) In this lies the asymmetry without which there wo-
uld be no self that would could adopt the viewpoint of another or a third party. The here and now
that separates itself from a distance, the past and future is part of the distinction and at the same
time it acts as a place where the distinction occurs. The same occurs as PRC Chinese make a
distinction between themselves from Taiwanese, Chinese from the West, as one ripple separates
itself from the next/other ripple (metaphorically).
Phenomenological reflections have revealed that the human self has a basic composition
of the living present. The two primary moments of the living present are the flowing and the
stasis: while enacting the flow, the self-confronted with a missing aspect the permanent. The
permanent is excluded from the flow. While flowing, the self is engaged in countering a stasis.
The self on one hand assumes the permanence and is referred to a flux. The stasis battles the flux
. Neither can be given without the other. The search for the self and its identity is the access to
these two moments. Relationship between permanence and flux is mediated by symbol designs
of a culture such as Yin and Yang of the Chinese.
Were faced with a passive stream of Herculean flux or the Great Tao, fundamental do-
mains of names for whose moments there is a lot of names; nothing in the flow with objective
identity. Names apply only to the constituted Identities: objective sense units. Such units iden-
tities are discovered in reflection that traces something constituting the flux, such as the identity
of a color, a sound, a smell, a number, or an ego.
At this level, the movement of stasis can only be constituted as a recognizable act of the
self that is flowing away and is given a symbolic designation ego. The ego marks the distance
between the acting self and its enactments. This contest suggests that the self cannot be exhaus-
ted in the identificable act ; act that is symbolized as an act of the ego. And yet, the ego is present
as a reflected self prior to an act of reflection. The identity of the self that enacts the flow is not
that of the ego as a stasis.
143
The present of the self its presence can be called the atemporal . Any temporality requi-
res an identifiable point of reference appearing in the flow of awareness. If the ego marks the first
identifiable acts in the flow, the distance between self and ego is equally the temporal. Temporal
location emerges not with passive constituents of the flux but in the active engagement of the self
as it attempts to identify itself with the ego.
Jumping ahead to the key elements of the passive-active side of passive synthesis. I will
employ for analysis of the topic at hand. For self to turn back upon itself, to revert to itself, it
must already have constituted a gap between the experiencing self and, despite the gulf, a mutu-
al reference between ought not to be lost. The self must refer to the ego in the flow of temporal
phases, and not by becoming one with it but by maintaining its permanence.
The history of the self is located at the level of first temporalization breaks out of imme-
diate self and establishment of temporality. In other words, the pre-reflective is traced out of the
prime flow of the ego and its constitution of the ground for differentiation which is, at the same
time, the constitution of the history of the self. All of his is prior to mediation. If reflection is
temporalization and primodial life is atemporal, then any reflection will have to explicate the
atemporal in a temporal way. Any grasp of temporality must remain at the pre-reflective level.
Once the atemporal life is conscious, it becomes identifiable as a temporalized object, an object
in flux.
Since all temporal designations originate with traditional metaphysics and ontology which
are often misleading. Therefore, it is necessary to exclude various temporal preconceptions. Both
the theoretical linear and the psychological polar cycle constructs of time as well as their oppo-
sites, eternity in a duration. Also, the spatial and linear metaphors and mythical topics are brac-
keted. What is left, and consists of possibilities for all time and all temporality of the identical
being as the universality of its past, present, future. The term atemporal avoids metaphysical pre-
judgment of fixity and ontological assumption of time or it stands between time and eternity..
The relationship between experience of permanence and flux can be designated as a transi-
tion period permanence transition is the proper naming of the constitution of the ground of self
and ego relationship. It opens access to a sense of otherness . The origin of the experience of the
sense of the other is already given in the atemporal activity of the self.
Having a sense of the other as being within other is not separated from being of the atem-
poral and self-presence seemed as the ego . This means an anonymous intersubjectivity is alre-
ady present. It is present in the constant slipping of the self-constituting in the transcendentality
of atemporality containing the co-presence of others functional present, of the sense of others as
permanent markers in the streaming activity of the self.
The self can enact the flux in ways that empower, maintain, support, and enhance the per-
manence of the ego in the flow. This is permanent maintenance. The ego and the acts attributed
to it acquire a sedimented and repeatable identity. One clusters the repeatable activities around
the ego, which becomes the history of the self. History of the self or communication is a dialo-
gical structure having the conditions for the possibility in the anonymously functioning absolute
self and its traces of temporalization and the primordial institutions of the sense of the We con-
sciousness in the flow of acts.
144
The Reconstruction of Chinese Identity: Self-Othering of Humiliation
Humiliation as mere passive victimization also invokes active history making and also re-
covery. We must appreciate the fundamental indeterminacy of relations between self and other.
Humiliation is one of the modes of drawing ethical boundaries between self and other, domestic
and foreign. With humiliation it is often the self that is othered.
For China there is a long record of humiliations: the First Opium War, the Second, Fran-
co-British, burning the Uuanming Garden palace, Sino-Japanses War (1894), Ghost of Black Ri-
ver, Russian massacre in Manchuria, Boxer Uprising (Rebellion), Russo-Japanese War (1905),
1931 Japanese invasion, Massacre of Nanjing (1937). National salvation is the polar of humi-
liation. In 1997, President Jiang Zemin told the Fifteenth Party Conference that living a relati-
vely comfortable life also serves to cleanse national humiliation. To cleanse national humilia-
tion, China must also move beyond a national salvation system.
Context
The economic reforms initiated by Deng Xiaoping in the late Seventies was a major chan-
ge from the Maoist past. The new leader implemented the revolutionary Open Door policies,
placing economic modernization at the center and setting the socialist ideology aside (Cum-
mings 1979). Holding a very pragmatic perspective, Deng opened the country to capitalist forces
and investments, seen as useful means to enhance economic development and raise the standard
of living of Chinese citizens. Although this new course, allowed China to make impressive and
outstanding economic advances, contributed to the fracture of the previous socialist national
identity and consequently brought about problems for the justification and legitimation of the
Communist regime. According to the socio-economic transformations it can be noted how nati-
onal identity has been renegotiated, reformulated and reconstructed over the past three decades
(Watson 1992, Chan 1993). Whether national identity had been defined exclusively in socialist
terms in opposition to capitalist and traditional culture, the late seventies saw the beginning of a
revaluation of Confucianism and Chinese tradition. Grounded in the unique history of the con-
tinent and the cultural heritage of the heartland, a national identity with specific and distinctive
Chinese characteristics has emerged. Confucian culture and tradition has come to constitute
the distinctive ideational features which especially distinguish Chinese political identity from
that of Western states. The question is, how has Chinese national identity or identities been con-
structed in the way that it has? How and why has this totalizing opposition between China and
the West been asserted? The answer is Branding of permanence and flux.
System Branding
Affectively, brands address a society or a group in society in which is seeking an under-

standing of itself; intellectually it must accommodate the society of many groups. Branding,
145
particularly political branding, relies on the possibility of a effective social integration; we all
share something, yet that some may not be identified or clearly named.
Brands are somewhat paradoxical. Brands have to highlight the possibility of switching
origin while meeting all interests. Therefore forms of consumer of branding show the possibility
of switching with some added features to tell them to stay. Opt out in order to be convinced to
opt back. It is schismogenesis brands necessary appeal. Self-observation prevails in appealing
to the targeted by observation of others as success or a success and Jerome selves. This is where
identity politics begins. And requires a group and matrix in brief, a network.
Another way of looking at brand is as a frame rather than keeping over flowing markets at
bay, invite the overflow. Brand should be able to overcome their own breakdown. Off-Brands
do not overflow and do provide the reality of the market through the prisim of brand. It will
stand as a chance of capturing the alteration of the groups/society.
If the network is another way to identify constituents and politics of mutual control,
Brand establishes a plan, a wall and an address within a network. Networks have no boundari-
es, consist of nodes and links that structurally invite the further nodes and links, each of which
place preceding nodes and links in jeopardy. Networks are structures that bring both the ingress
and its elements of face offer will ways to deal with them. A brand is self-reflective of the net-
work lives. Its automation tells us what we need to know about the entity extolling it. Branding
functions to product identification, pure and simple. Indeed since Marxist-Leninist ideology
had been set aside, the national identity, defined exclusively in socialist terms, was fractured
and the Communist regime, losing its ideological pillar, faced problems of justification. These
domestic problems were worsened by the external influences that inundated China during the
modernization process, in particular the flows of dangerous images and ideas coming from the
West, such as the democratization of former socialist countries in Eastern Europe after the end
of the Cold War. Communist leaders have tried to justify the maintenance of the one-party rule
on the basis of the specific historical and cultural conditions of the continent, the so called spe-
cial Chinese characteristics. Thus the opposition between China and the West is functional to
the Beijings projects of conservation of the Communist regime. State officials have especially
underlined that China has a distinctive national identity that is spiritually different from the
West. Democracy and liberalism are considered Western ideologies and thereby deemed incom-
patible with Chinese national characteristics Hence the revival of Confucian ideology can be
comprehended as a way to provide the people with a sort of national identity that would serve as
a bulwark against the ideological impacts from the West following rapid economic development.
Chinese policy-makers, in self-reflexive strategy of self-orientalizing discourse, have challen-
ged the ideology of eurocentric modernity (Western liberalism) by claiming a specific Chinese
model of political and social organization that developed a different form of capitalism hinged
on Confucian principles. In this way Chinese leaders invoke a particular Chinese modernity,
rejecting the natural and global evolution to liberal democracy envisaged by Fukuyama, thereby
negatively dubbed westernization mainstream works conceive political identity as a given that
is possessed by a certain community sharing unitary physical and cultural traits. This political
community has been defined as timeless, a determined set of values, principles and ideas that
can be object of social and political analysis and explain their behaviors for instance whether
146
a community has peaceful orientations or is aggressive against another one and the reasons for
their economic successes or failures.
Indeed China is depicted as pure and coherent enclave of identity that is not affected by
external influences. This perspective reproduces the stereotypical orientalist binary opposition
between East and West, in which the Western foundational principles of freedom and human
rights necessarily clashes against the Confucian and authoritarian values of the Chinese civiliza-
tion. It is a mutually exclusive relationship in which the opposition is either completely East or
totally West. Multiplicity, ambiguities and indeterminacies of the identities that cross China
disappear, depluralizing Chinese community into a solid Confucian entity.
Diaspora mobilization may shed some light on transnational processes of identity forma-
tion and show how identities are contested, contingent, fluid, and multiple. Diaspora refers to
any population that has an origin different from the place where it resides and which retains clo-
se ties with its mother-land, made possible by recent advances of communication and transpor-
tation technologies Such deterritorialized people conserve the language, traditions and histories
from the place of origin but living in a different country have to come to terms and relate with
new cultures (Hall 1992). This does not entail simply assimilation to them or the loss of their
identity and traditions altogether, yet are formed at one and the same time on several cultures,
becoming hybrid and multicultural.
As Nonini and Ong, analyzing Chinese diasporic mobilizations put it, different identities
- gender, race, nationality, subculture, dominant culture -intersect in and constitute an individual.
A person is therefore a site of differences; someone can be simultaneously Indonesian, Chinese,
working-class, and a mother, as well all of these together. Callahan pointing out how one can be
Chinese and Thai at the same time highlighted the usefulness of the diaspora narrative inasmuch
as it constitutes a heterotopia, literally another space where multiplicity and incoherency
are accepted in juxtaposition to the conventional utopian pursuit of a single and homogeneous
identity that leads to rigid classification of Self and Other.
The mobility of todays transnational situation often results in feelings of being in-bet-
ween, of not being able to relate completely with ones native culture of the vulture which one
is currently experiencing. For instance, Chinese artists, art and identity may no longer be defined
simply by gender or a singular culture, but are, instead, hybrids of East and West, masculine and
feminine, past and present. The Chinese diaspora has become a major influence on the social-
cultural revolution and modernization of Chinese communities inside and outside the mainland.
Prominent Chinese migrant artists often inhabit in and in-between space, straddling disparate
cultures and societies. The idea of the individual thus becomes multiple and presenting a mosaic
of possibilities. This has prompted these artists to reflect on their transnational identifies.
The Reconstruction of National Identity in Post-Mao China: An Attempt to Resolve

Domestic Political Problems and Buttress the Security of the Regime?
It may be argued that the support of the Confucian Renaissance in the Dengist era may
be related to the events that devastated China few years earlier. Indeed the terrible destruction
of anything associated with the past during the Cultural Revolution may have aroused a sense
147
of void in the population and consequently have prompted soul-searching. Waldron maintained
that the demolition of the Great Wall and other important temples and monuments throughout
China, may have deprived Chinese people of the national symbols with which they were iden-
tifying (ibid.). The fact that there was almost no material sign left of the Chinese ancient culture
spurred a desire for restoration. Thus the positive attitude of state officials towards tradition can
be seen as a temporary reaction to the excesses and errors of the Cultural Revolution, a way to
define the present against a negative episode of the recent past.
The Confucian revival can be better understood when linked with the socio-economic
transformations initiated in post-Mao China. The economic reforms implemented by Deng Xia-
oping contributed to the fragmentation of the national identity that up until then had been defined
only in socialist terms. Moreover following rapid modernization the Chinese national identity,
firmly determined by socialism and defined by the territorial boundedness of the mainland, came
under pressure when the country was opened up to capitalist forces and investments. Deng Xi-
aoping and other Chinese reformers, regarding economic modernization as regimes top priority
and relying on the pragmatic cat theory a cat, whether black or white, is good as long as it
can catch mice maintained that China could even use capitalism as long as it was conduci-
ve to economic development. This new approach carried several relevant consequences in the
Chinese sociopolitical society. Indeed the Chinese socialist identity, which had been specifically
articulated against the evil capitalist Other during Maos leadership, was contradicted and
going to be fractured. Deng tried to cope with this problem and eliminate any possible psycho-
logical and ideological obstacles by launching a campaign to reassess Maoism and justify the
continuation of the economic reforms under the guide of the Communist Party. Nevertheless,
especially among intellectuals and students, the demise of ideology resulted in what Zhao Suis-
heng defined the three belief crises: crisis of faith in socialism, crisis of belief in Marxism and
crisis of trust in the Party.
CITIC (China International Trust and Investment Company) was founded in 1978 by
Deng Xiao Ping as the experiment in Capitalism and in preparation for the return of Hong Kong
to China in 1998. CITIC is considered the company that is a gate keeper to business in China. It
is a 100 billion dollar (USD) conglomerate with 75 companies under its banner. It practices are
described as Confucian Guanxi Capitalism. As the flagship of Chinese reforms, it was CITICs
mission to adopt Capitalism to the Chinese way. CITCI became the tangible face of the planned
disruption of socialism in China. The objective is to institute Capitalism, flux within the system
yet facilitates the change through the permanence of Confucianism.
The crisis of identity was worsened by the incredible [in]flux of people, capital, inves-
tments, information and media images that swamped China from early eighties onwards. With
the implementation of economic reforms China, which had been a self-sealed giant during the
Maoist period, was opened to global cultural flows that have a pluralizing and deterritoriali-
zing effect. The same process of modernization that on one side allowed China to get access to
science and technology and consequently boost its economic development, on the other expo-
sed the country to threatening foreign influences that challenged the culture of boundedness
and fixity of the national identity and enabled the formation of transnational publics . Indeed an
148
increasing number of people not only have had the opportunities to watch foreign films, listen
to international music and identify with others coming from outside, like the Taiwanese pop
stars, the Korean soap opera characters or the Hong Kong actors, but also have had the chances
to get in touch and possibly embrace dangerous political ideas such as democracy and libera-
lism. Hence the uncontrollable flows of ideas and images deepened the crisis of national identity
and provided the ideological basis to the formation of a pro-democracy movement that led to the
subsequent Tiananmen demonstrations in spring 1989.
As Gloria Davies put it,
The democracy movement is symptomatic of the crisis experienced by a society
when the relative homogeneity imposed on political, economic and cultural practices by
government collapses through the emergence of new networks formed by local, national
and foreign interests.
However, it must be pointed that the picture of a single individual stopping a Chi-
nese tank from entering the square was a humiliation to the Chinese government an
individual stepped out from the group. That was contra-harmony in the maintenance of
Chinese identity
The Communist leaders saw the regime security being undermined by the continuous ex-
posure to foreign influences following the economic modernization. Moreover, the democratiza-
tion of former socialist states in Eastern Europe could represent a dangerous example inasmuch
as the Chinese population could demand the same kind of reforms by the Communist leaders.
The maintenance of the regime could be explained only on the basis of different Chinese con-
ditions. Indeed policy-makers elaborated the key concept of Chinese special characteristics
(Zhongguo Tese) that could legitimize on the one hand Dengs economic reforms and on the
other the maintenance of the socialist system (Clausen 1998: 260). Due to Chinese distinctive
features state officials could carry forward a specific form of socialism, opening to capitalism
to boost economic development while still conserving the guidance of the Chinese Communist
Party (CCP), deemed indispensable. Chinese peculiarity was provided by its unique history and
splendid culture that were spiritually different from the West. As Li Ruihuan, a member of the
CCP Politburo and one of the closest allies of Deng put it,
Chinas national culture is long-standing, well-established, rich, profound and influential,
occupying an extremely important position in the history of the worlds civilization. Our ances-
tors have bequeathed us extremely rich and extremely precious cultural legacy, which we sho-
uld cherish, protect and explorep.(Hence) the cultivation of socialist new culture with Chinese
characteristics must be rooted in the rich culture of the Chinese nation. Carrying forward this
national culture will provide us with an important condition to inspire national spirit, strengthen
national dignity and confidence, display patriotic spirit and withstand all external pressure.
Confucianism, once rapped as the source of ten thousand evils, has now been revalu-
ated as the essence of Chinese culture. In the words of the state official Gu Mu, Confucius was
the great thinker, educator and politician of ancient China and indeed the founder of traditio-
149
nal Chinese culture. A national survey of college students on who were the greatest thinkers in
world history, resulted in the top three as (1) Confucius, (2) Albert Einstein, and (3) Frederich
Nietzsche. (The survey was conducted by China Associates of Social Science.)
Numerous Confucian conferences of intellectuals were underlining how the characte-
ristics of Chinese culture are in fact, the characteristics of the Confucian thought and praising
Confucianism for its determinant influence exercised on the values and customs of Chinese so-
ciety. Instead of being regarded as the arch-enemy of Chinas modernization and survival like
in the recent past, Confucian thought now could be a guide for the future. Confucian ideals
were also credited to have laid the basis for the national unification since they were advocating
harmonious relations between the Han and minority nationalities.. In addition to these praises
for Confucianism, the Communist Partys Secretary General at that time, Jiang Zemin, provided
the most authoritative and significant endorsement of the Confucian revival when he attended a
Confucian symposium and addressed the public by saying, Confucius was one of the Chinas
great thinkers and his doctrine is part of Chinas precious cultural heritage. We must thoroughly
study his fine ideals and carry them into the future. Jiang was even the first leader who frequ-
ently cited Confucian classics in official speeches, indeed a sign that remarks how traditional
culture has been revaluated and readapted to the present.
Hence state officials have been trying to construct a Chineseness rooted in the cultural
heritage and bounded in the territory of the mainland for their own political purposes. Nonethe-
less state officials articulating a unitary political identity linked with tradition and reproducing
a clear and definite opposition between the Chinese national Self and the Western Other for
their political purposes obscured the complexity and ambiguity of the contemporary condition
affected by trans-nationalization.
Indeed Confucianism, now depicted as the the backbone of the great achievements of
Chinese civilization and the mainstay of Chinese traditional culture, was revived because
this ideology not only could provide Chinese people with a homogeneous national identity but
could also serve as a bulwark against all threatening foreign influences coming from the West.
Confucian values could be used as a traditional criteria for rejecting decadent and liberal wes-
tern ideals, in the words of a leading sinologist, now Confucianism, not Marxist revolutionary
morality, is to guard the gates against Western decadence. Beijings pragmatic leaders are increa-
singly disposed to lean on a conservative version of Chinese tradition as the best guarantor of the
status quo. Similarly in the essay Confucianism and Dengs China Adrian Chan concluded
that the reinterpretations of Confucianism in the Deng era are not a matter of knowing the past
but are done according to the needs of the present. The reincarnation of Confucianism, whose
principles of social stability and respect of authority have been carefully selected, is performed
to provide the necessary legitimation for the political regime.
Selling Modern Western Values
Another way to sell transnationalism is to sell Western values in the Chinese market.
Values such as freedom, individualism, happiness, mobility, and pleasure are especially appea-
150
ling among young Chinese consumers (and appropriate to the Chinese government). English is
predominantly used in the commercial, which conveys a sense of foreignness and globality.
China Mobile uses the slogan Connect with freedom, unlimited possibilities, which expli-
citly sells the concept of freedom. It celebrates the unlimited possibilities of connecting to the
Internet through a cell phone, without questioning the limited content that Chinese consumers
can access, due to regulations implemented by the Chinese government to block and filter Web
sites. These values are sold precisely because they are desired in a society that does not provide
unlimited personal choices. Individual rights are still constrained by the institutions of the patri-
archic family, the authoritative school, the workplace, and the state. As I have said, state gover-
nment sees individuality as a necessary part of Chinese integration with the West.
Marketing Dreams About the Grand Unity and Universal Humanity
Todays ads simultaneously express transnationalism and nationalism. On one hand, it

sells the notion that children of the world have a common desire to know each other and they
will one day gather together, and create a harmonious world. The idea of harmony is especially
important in the Chinese model of nationhood. It aims not only to present China as a peaceful
nation that can live in harmony with its neighboring countries, but also to project a different ideal
of society that can transcend language, cultural, class and racial boundaries. The emphasis on the
Chinese boy singing clearly puts China in a leadership position of the world harmony. The red
scarf on the singing boy is significant to many Chinese because it represents childhood as well
as nationalism that we are taught as children -- somewhat similar to the Pledge of Allegiance for
Americans.
On the other hand, such a harmonious world is created only when all kids are running
on the Great Wall, and toward the Temple of Heaven as if they were all worshipers of Chinese
culture. The image toward the end is fuzzy and the camera is positioned in a particular way to
hide the fact that all kids at the Temple are Chinese, but they are dressed up in an exotic fashion,
with girls in beret and boys in Middle Eastern head scarves. The commercial is thus about Chi-
na constructing the other cultures in order to project its role in world harmony. Even though the
target audiences are Chinese consumers, the commercial expresses hope for a global harmony.
The universal dream of connecting the world is to be accomplished through Chinese culture and
especially through China Mobile. In this commercial what is national is made universal, which
resonates with the often-heard saying in China that what is national is what is universal. Pe-
ace and harmony reflects Chinas soft power position rather than military power and mere body
power.
Many Chinese ads have mixed Chinese and foreign elements, and Chinese and foreign
models to convey commercial messages such as the entire world is one family, sports has no
foreignness or Chineseness, and in my eye, there is no national boundary, to name a few. In
these ads, the grand unity of the world (tianxia datong) echoes an influential belief in Confucia-
nism, which advocated that there was not a way but the way of understanding the world. For
example, in his Da Tongshu, Kang Youwei (a prominent Confucian scholar in the Qing Dynasty)
151
made a plan for world unity and for an ideal society where all people would live in harmony. He
considered ren (compassion, love, or benevolence) as the main factor that would resolve world
problems. Duara points out that universalistic assertion in Confucianism often cover the com-
promise when Chinese culture encounters other cultures. It is interesting that proposals of the
Grand Unity often happen in transitional China.
In Kang Youweis time, China was repeatedly defeated by Western powers. Many Chine-
se scholars thus blamed Chinese culture for Chinas weakness. Contemporary China is rapidly
integrating itself with the capitalist world system. As a rising power, China has started to re-
claim its cultural tradition and its rightful place in the world. Marketing such universal claims
is thus associated with the resumed confidence of China. Rather than turning inward, Chinese
corporations have turned outward and begun to exploit the world market literally and symboli-
cally. It is, therefore, not surprising to see that selling dreams have become a common theme in
Chinese advertising: dreams of knowing the world, of being known to and appreciated by the
world, of flying high, and of becoming the world center again. As China starts to embrace the
world, it also opens its landscape to foreigners.
Chinese Products Reaching Out to the World
While China Mobile and China Unicom ads invite Westerners in, ads of other Chinese
products sell their success in reaching out to the West. Haier, for example, has conducted vario-
us campaigns featuring how foreign media reports have praised its world quality and how eager
foreign retailers want to carry its products. Its many commercials imply that Haier is now in a
superior position compared with foreign retailers because it has the power to grant licenses to
them. Many Haier commercials also proudly announce Haier, made in China, as another way
to assert that the Chinese have stood up.
The representations of Chineseness and transnationalism in Chinese ads simultaneously
reflect Chinas ambivalence toward its tradition and the West, and its assertiveness and confi-
dence in global economy. On one hand, rapid economic development of China has made Chine-
se producers more assertive in claiming their Chinese identity in relation to the West. Chinese
marketers are very active in producing and selling Chineseness centered on mainland China,
and extends to the Chinese residing in other countries. Chinese marketers select, utilize, and
reorganize Chinas past history, in particular its anti-foreign history, in relation to the Western
Other in order to construct an unchanging history of patriotism. China is portrayed as a strong
father, a nurturing mother, a victor, a victim, a unique entity and a global unifier. Chineseness
is about the past glory and its future role in transcending global differences. On the other hand,
there remains a pervasive idea of viewing Chinese culture and tradition as backward and incom-
patible with modernity.
The West is largely viewed as representing progress and modernity, and China is positio-
ned in opposition. The use of foreign models to endorse Chinese products implies that China still
needs Westerners to endorse its modern development. Chinese producers use European-style
152
architecture and well-known tourist sites to symbolize taste and social status in an attempt to
obtain modern images. To some extent, selling transnationalism demonstrates a deep desire of
Chinese producers, in particular, and Chinese society, in general, to be accepted and celebrated
by the international community.
The portrayal of nationalism and transnationalism in Chinese ads further symbolizes the
ideological construction of Chinese consumer culture. In essence, consumer culture in China is a
middle-class phenomenon. Middle-class consumers in China are sometimes described as small
people with big dreams. The marketing of transnationalism, to some extent, reflects a deep an-
xiety of middle-class.
Aesthetics Pop Cutural Changes
The arts would have marked change in 1989 with Tianmen Square: the individual taking
a stand marks a polarity transition in the art of China from a Utopian promise to Pop Politics
and Cynical Realism. The shift in Tianmen Square reconfigured the Chinese narrative overnight
by bending times arrow from a linear narrative to a temporal one which evaporates in black
holes.
Various thematics start to appear in the 1990s and in the new millennium. Deep time/
shallow time, off-shore/off-center, termporality appears as a thematic at the Quanxi Exhibition,
and Shape of Time Exhibition. The comparative of the Exhibitions is the installation art marked
by a dynamic, three-dimensional netting of different matters, (fishnet or wires) which undulate
and curve in loops; these installations are different yet similar, both akin to a truncated human
nervous pattern. The comparative is given of these Exhibitions guanxi and time overlap, crea-
ting guanxi time. Even Confucius becomes a new aesthetic through hip-hop and rapping
- Hip-hop culture is four in one: graffiti, rap, DJs (disc jockey) and hip-hop dance. In
China hip-hop culture is well developed and commercialized. Yet, in China, it is cool not to be
selfish; it is cool to be dedicated and hardworking. Beauty is strength.
A quote from the well-known hip-hop DJ, J. Fever:
In the U.S. rapping and hip-hop are all about BAM: Babes And Money.
In China ,a rapper takes a different position than the lifestyle than the U.S. rapper. But
they agree with Confucianism on treating the family as the number one priority and that gover-
nment should have less control of the population.
It is all about self-expression. In the NYC, South Bronx ghetto, raps birthplace, there
is no real employment. Rapping includes in part old African traditions of rhyming slang to put
down an enemy or friends. It developed from the street jive of early the 1980s becoming for
many urban youth a new, youth-bound way of talking: half-speaking, half-singing comprised of
rhythm and fast repartee. Staying on the beat is how rap flows, and requires great breath control,
literary alliteration and double-entendre.
Confucian Rap emphasizes the performative of life over reputation and materiality. You
have to enact the name to claim the name. It is all about the rectification of name. Confucian
Rap is about justice respect, dignity, and filial piety. It has become a part of the street theatre of
153
social criticism. Confucian Rap is also re-creating, addressesing the political aspect of Chinese
individual(ism).
China is now all about transformation, happening at different levels. Body transforma-
tion has become a part of Chinese females culture, spreading across several age groups. To
U.S. men, the traditional Asian eye appearance is more appealing than that of U.S. women. In
contrast, U.S. women are not surgically altering their bodies to attain an Asian look. In fact, in
the U.S., the status is often the ability to have (afford) the surgery itself rather than the accom-
plished look, that is, the expensive surgery itself is the difference that makes the difference.
Transformation, renewal, transition is Chinas quest. Yet there is a stabiliting mechanism in a
change institution: guanxi
Guanxi
Interpersonal relationship (guanxi) is one of the major dynamics of Chinese society. Gu-
anxi has been a pervasive part of the Chinese business world for the last few centuries.
Guanxi is one of the major dynamics in Chinese society. Guanxi has been a pervasive part
of the Chinese business world for the last few centuries. It binds literally millions of Chinese
firms into a social and business web. It is widely recognized that guanxi is a key business deter-
minant of firm performance. It is the lifeblood of both the macro-economy and micro- business
conduct. Any business in this society, including both local firms and foreign investors and mar-
keters, inevitably faces guanxi dynamics. No company can go far unless it has extensive guanxi
networks in this setting.
The Chinese word guanxi refers to the concept of drawing forms an intricate, perva-
sive relational network which the Chinese cultivate energetically, subtly, and imaginatively. It
contains implicit mutual obligations, assurances, and understanding, and governs Chinese atti-
tudes toward long-term social and business relationships. Broadly, guanxi means interpersonal
linkages with the implication of continued exchange of favors. Guanxi is therefore more than a
friendship or simple interpersonal relationship; it includes reciprocal obligations to respond to
requests for assistance. Unlike inter-firm networking in the West, however, this reciprocity is
implicit, without time specifications, not necessarily equivalent, and only socially binding.
Interpersonal relations are certainly not peculiar to the Chinese society. They exist to so-
me extent in every human society. What is special about guanxi is the fact that it is ubiquitous
and plays a fundamental role in daily life. The Chinese have turned guanxi into a carefully cal-
culated science. Constructing and maintaining guanxi is a common preoccupation for entrepre-
neurs, managers, officials, and even college students.
Although used in speech since a century ago, guanxi does not appear in either of the
classic Chinese dictionaries (Source of Words, published in 1915 or Word Sea, published
in 1936). The word consists of two calligraphy characters; guanxi (written in pin yin) originally
meant a door, its extended meaning is to close up. Thinking metaphorically, inside the door
you may be one of us but outside the door your existence is barely recognized. Today guan
is often used to mean a pass in various sorts of economic lives, from social activities to orga-
154
nizational names (e.g., hai means customs). In addition, guan can refer to doing someone a
favor. For instance, gun xin means showing solicitude for, gun huai means showing loving
care for, and guan zhao means looking after or support.
Xi means to tie up and extend relationships, such as kinship (shi xi) and directly-related
members of ones family (zhi xi qin shu). It implies formalization and hierarchy. Whilst the word
primarily applies to individuals, the concept can also be used similarly with organizations (e.g.,
xi means department). Xi can also be used to refer to maintaining long term relationships. For
instance, wei xi means to maintain.
In practice, however, the Chinese use guanxi xue to express their concern with the tactics
of guanxi construction and cultivation. Guanxi xue refers to the practical strategies that best en-
sure personal relationship building, utilization, and development. It implies skill, subtlety, and
cunning, as conveyed by the English word artfulness.
Guanxi xue involves the exchange of favors and gifts, the cultivation of personal relati-
onships and networks of mutual dependence, and the manufacturing of obligation and indebted-
ness. What informs these practices and their native descriptions is the conception of the primacy
and binding power of personal relationships and their importance in meeting the needs and de-
sires of everyday life.
As mentioned above, doors are an important metaphor. To digress a bit, we need to con-
sider doors of guanxi and of Confucius.
The Construction of the Door
Three aspects of the craftiness associated with the door are:

(1) The door hinge, which is considered to be a crafty mechanism inherently attaining the
advantageous shi utilizing a levered balance to allow a small force to maneuver a lar-
ge mass. Facilitated by this clever device - the door hinge - a door is configured into
a movable boundary. Because a door can be positioned as closed, open, or half open,
these positions acquired different spatial perceptions and cultural meanings.
(2) The use of sacred amulets on the door or hood of the door to cunningly convey a set
of metaphysical dispositions and powers beyond the doors physical functions. Thus,
a physically closed door can be metaphysically open to bestow various blessings on
the people living within the demarcated space. Conversely, a physically open door
can metaphysically shut out the intrusion of evil spirits.
(3) The tectonic cleverness of door construction. Through the craftsmans intelligent use
of the advantageous shi, various doors were built economically and skillfully to fit the
requirement of different circumstances (situation).
The Ritual and Cosmology in the Orientation and Size of the Door
According to the theory of ritual and cosmological shi, traditional Chinese house doors
were built as ritualistic and cosmological entities by manipulating the size and orientation of the
155
doors. How the orientation and size of a door is used to embody ritual shi can be analyzed by
looking into the classical Confucian scriptures, such as the Book of Etiquette (yili) and the Book
of Records (liji).
In these Confucian scriptures, the center of the door bears the most significant ritual mea-
ning and possesses the most powerful shi. Although the east side of a door is not as prominent in
status, it takes precedence over the west side. Such Confucian orientation hierarchies originated
from the understandings of cosmological orientation during the ancient times. The Confucian
scriptures also reveal that the grander sizes of doors embody a more powerful ritual shi than do
simpler doors. Over the centuries, the various Confucian government decrees regulated the sizes
of doors based on social hierarchies affecting house door design and construction. Officials were
given the larger and grander doors, while lesser individuals were allowed smaller and simpler
doors. In addition, within the same house, a door with a central orientation was taken to possess
higher social status and was built more grandly than the doors on the east side and in a more im-
posing manner than doors on the west side.
The orientation and size of house doors, besides embodying ritual shi, bestow favorable
cosmological shi if they are positioned in auspicious directions and sized to favorable dimen-
sions. This follows the cosmological shi, as construed in Fengshui theories. Only house doors
with a favorable orientation and appropriate size can contain beneficial cosmological shi with
which to bless occupants. The details of the methods and theories used to determine favorable
house door orientations and sizes are analyzed here by studying some of the traditional Fengshui
treatises on dwellings.
The Self-So-Doing of the Door in Organizing Space and Movement
In the context of traditional Chinese architecture, the self-so-doing shi of the door allows
it to be natural so as to follow the intrinsic tendency of a door in organizing space and directing
movement. To analyze this self-so-doing shi of the door, the ancient and pivotal role of the door
as an organizer of space and movement is explored. Antique chamber dwellings and courtyard
houses demonstrate how the position of the door functions to arrange space and guide circula-
tion. Some of the simple yet elegant private house garden doors demonstrate how these garden
doors were built to be natural. Their naturalness represented by the simplicity of their forms
blends the garden doors into the garden scenes as well as amplifies the self-so-doing shi of them
in organizing the garden scenes and guiding the movements of the body. Even within the limited
space of some old Chinese houses the route of circulation is created through an arrangement of
doors to allow a free and natural wandering of the body across multiple levels.
All the aspects of shi (i.e., advantageous shi, authoritative and ritual shi, and self-so-doing
shi) are epistemologically built into various household doors. The complexity, diversity, and ric-
hness of doors as an architectural element reveal that the concept of shi in architecture does not
allow for a static or permanent interpretation. Instead, the concept of shi requires each situation
and every moment in time to be regarded as unique.
By nature, shi is amorphous and weak because it mutates in accordance with the transfor-
156
mation of design and construction circumstances and underscores the fluid experience of tem-
porality. It supports an open system that progresses from minute detail to broad concept, rather
than a process of closing down from broad concept to minute detail. The amorphous and weak
essence of shi in architecture gives it a constructive power that results in the making of building
elements fitting in the traditional Chinese cultural context. Guanxi in business means to be able
to open a door but each door has rituals for entering and boundaries to be obeyed.
To understand the importance of guanxi and how it operates, one must look to Chinas
Confucian legacy. According to Confucianism, an individual is fundamentally a social or relati-
onal being. Social order and stability zun ik was used in Confucian depend on properly differen-
tiated role relationships between particular individuals. The word ideology to refer to a concept
similar to guanxi. There are five such traditional relationships (wu-zunk): prince-subject, father
-son, older brother-younger brother, husband-wife, and friend-friend. All are superior-subordi-
nate relationships except friend to friend. Confucian relationships were therefore a classificatory
paternalistic order which ranked from parents to the sovereign through the master and servant.
These five relationships are the basis of Chinese social networks.
Wu-lun is a highly formal cultural system, requiring each actor to perform his or her
role in such a way that he or she says precisely what he or she is supposed to say, and does not
say what he or she is not supposed to say. In order to perform ones role well, the actor usually
has to hide his or her independent will. This is why Chinese have been said to be situation-cen-
tered or situationally determined.
Because of the heavy influence of Confucianism, Chinese often view themselves as in-
terdependent with the surrounding social context. The self in relation to the other becomes the
focus of individual experience. This view of an interdependent self is in sharp contrast to the
Western view of an independent self. The latter sees each human being as an independent, self-
contained, and autonomous entity who (a) comprises a unique configuration of internal attributes
(e.g., traits, abilities, motives, and values) and (b) behaves primarily as a consequence of these
internal attributes. This divergent view of self has implications for a variety of basic psychologi-
cal processes (e.g., cognition, emotion, and motivation) and may be one of the most fundamental
differences between the East and the West in social relations.
In a relation-centered world, social relations are accorded much greater significance. Re-
lationships are often seen as ends in and of themselves rather than as means for realizing various
individual goals. As part of the emphasis on differentiated relationships, attention to others is
highly selective and mostly characteristic of relationships with in-group members. Many obser-
vers of Chinese social relations have noted that in comparison to the West, Chinese have a much
stronger tendency to divide people into categories and treat them accordingly. This tendency of
treating people differently depending on ones relationship to them constitutes the basic reason
why guanxi is of such importance in Chinese societies.
Yang described the three major categories of interpersonal relations in China: jia-ren
(family members), shou-ren (familiar persons such as relatives outside the family, neighbors or
people in the same village, friends, colleagues, or classmates), and sheng-ren (mere acquain-
tances or strangers). These three categories of relationship have completely different social and
157
psychological meanings to the parties involved and are governed by different sets of interper-
sonal rules.
The sheng-ren (stranger or mere acquaintance) category includes all those who are outsi-
de the family unit and with whom one has not established any meaningful relationship through
past interactions. These could include members of ones local community, fellow employees
who work in the same (large) company, or business customers. Interactions with sheng-ren are
superficial and temporary and are dominated by utilitarian concerns. The focus is on personal
gain and loss. The defining characteristic of this relationship is instrumentality without affection,
unlike the relationship with jia-ren, which involves primarily affection, or shou-ren, which has
both an instrumental and an affect component.
In summary, depending on the bases of guanxi, an interpersonal relationship can fall in-
to any one of three categories. Within each category, the relationship can vary in the degree of
closeness or strength. For example, involvement with a co-worker who was also a college clas-
smate implies a stronger relationship than with one who was not a classmate. To the traditional
Chinese, guanxi was primarily meaningful for the jia-ren and shou-ren categories. However, as
Chinese societies moved away from a traditional, agrarian life style to an industrialized, plura-
listic one, individual freedom has risen and collective forces have ebbed. The potential for inter-
personal relationships in the sheng-ren category has become increasingly important.
Philosophy of Guanxi
Guanxi are delicate fibers woven into every Chinese individuals social life, and there-
fore, into many aspects of Chinese society. Although the cultivation of guanxi has become the
focus of researcher attention only since the decentralization and privatization of the Chinese eco-
nomy, its roots are deeply embedded in 2000 years of Chinese culture. Confucian social theory
is concerned with the question of how to establish a harmonious secular order in a man-centered
world. According to Confucianist philosophy, the individual is never an isolated, separate en-
tity. All humans are social or interactive beings. Although guni was not found in the Confucian
classics, the word lun was used. The concept of lun concerns the differentiation of individuals
and the kinds of relationships to be established between individuals. Confucian social order is
constructed upon the concept of lun.
There are eight principles of moral behavior. They are:

zhong (loyalty),
xiuo (respect),
ren (kindness),
ui (love),
xin (trust),
yi (justice),
he fa (harmony), and
ping y (peace).
158
These principles are the foundation of Chinese human relations and networks. An actor in
the network should obey these principles in order to maintain his or her face before society.
Ever since Confucius codified the societal rules, values, and hierarchical structures of
authority during the sixth century, B.C., Chinese society has been functioning within clan-like
networks. Such networks can be viewed as concentric circles. Close family members are at the
core and distant relatives, classmates, friends, and acquaintances are peripherally arranged in ac-
cordance to the distance of relationship and degree of trusts. A purposeful investment in time and
energy is frequently made to maintain and extend such networks. When a situation arises where
ones business undertaking is beyond ones individual capacity, the guanxi network is often mo-
bilized to influence some key persons decision making in order to achieve desirable results.
As a social philosophy, Confucianism is concerned with the practical task of trying to
establish a social hierarchy strong enough to harmonize a large and complex society of contenti-
ous human beings. One of Confucianisms key tenets holds that all human relationships fall into
two categories, predetermined and voluntary. In a predetermined relationship, behavioral
expectations are dictated by ones status within and responsibilities to a predetermined group,
such as ones family. Individual desires are heavily downplayed. But in many relationships that
take place beyond the family, the individual plays an active role in determining the character and
tone of the exchanges. These are voluntary relationships. The individuals dual role -both as a
passive follower of predetermined Guanxi and Business relationships and initiator of voluntary
relationships -can make guanxi interactions very complicated. The Chinese people place great
stock in the importance of mianzi (face). This is an individuals public or social image gained by
performing one or more specific social roles that are well recognized by others. Though highly
abstract, the concept of face is treated by the Chinese as something that can be defined quan-
titatively. How much face an individual has depends partly on his or her guanxi network. The
larger ones guanxi network, and the more powerful the people connected within it are, the more
face one has. One needs to have a certain amount of face in order to cultivate new guanxi rela-
tionships. Mianzi also provides the leverage one needs to successfully expand and manipulate
a guanxi network. Enjoying the prestige of not losing face and, at the same time, saving other
peoples face are key components in the dynamics of guanxi. According to tradition, losing
face socially is comparable to the physical mutilation of ones eyes, nose, or mouth. Mianzi is
therefore an intangible form of social currency and personal status, often determined by social
position and material wealth.
In a guanxi relationship, both parties must carefully observe certain unspoken rules of
reciprocity and equity. Disregarding or violating these rules can seriously damage ones repu-
tation and lead to a humiliating loss of prestige. The loss of face associated with opportunistic
behavior spreads quickly through the guanxi network due to its transferability. Opportunistic be-
havior with one exchange partner can be interpreted as opportunistic behavior by people within
the entire network. Opportunistic behavior only becomes an attractive option when the expected
payoff from such behavior outweighs the expected costs. In a guanxi network, the cost of op-
portunism is the potential loss of exchange opportunities with all members of the network. The
larger and more richly connected the guanxi network, the greater the assurance that an individual
159
exchange partner within the network will not risk the potential ostracism that could result from
opportunistic behavior. The mere promise of network expansion provides increased assurance
that ones exchange partner will not act opportunistically. Guanxi thereby replaces the need for
trust in an exchange relationship. Another related concept is renqing -unpaid obligations resul-
ting from invoking a guanxi relationship. Renqing is a form of social capital that can provide le-
verage during interpersonal exchanges of favors. Developing renqing is both a precondition for
the establishment of guanxi and a consequence of using it to ones own advantage. While Chine-
se people weave networks of guanxi, they also weave webs of renqing obligations that must be
repaid in the near future. In essence, renqing provides the moral foundation for the reciprocity
and equity that are implicit in all guanxi relationships. If you disregard the rule of equity while
exchanging renqing favors, you may lose face, hurt your friends feelings, and jeopardize your
guanxi network.
Guanxi is embedded in renqing formulation as an endless flow of interpersonal exchanges
and reciprocal commitments. The discourse of renqing articulates the moral and decorous cha-
racter of social conduct. It implies the necessity for reciprocity, obligation, and indebtedness in
human relations. What activates reciprocal relations and imbues these relationships with a sense
of obligation and indebtedness are relational sentiments and ethics.
The positive role of guanxi is determined by the degree of closeness between parties,
which is further determined by ganqing (human feelings or affection). Ganqing is a measure of
the emotional commitment of the parties involved. Generally, ganqing involves greater degrees
of affection than renqing. Giving gifts to a government official is a matter of courtesy and obser-
vance of proper social form and etiquette. It can lead to the establishment of a good relationship,
but not to ganqing. To demonstrate that ones ganqing is sincere, one must live up to the guanxi
obligations upon which ones ganqing is based. Together, guanxi and ganqing create and mainta-
in emotional connections between individual Chinese while defining the activities that constitute
their mutual social identities. Hence, guanxi is often viewed as an essential element of Chinese
socio-cultural behavior and an important dimension in the social structure of Chinese society.
The value of ganqing and guanxi is not static, but changes over time. Both the occurren-
ce of ganqing and the development of close guanxi hinge upon continued social interaction and
mutual help. The type of guanxi base does not, however, appear to affect the development of
close guanxi imbued with ganqing. The value of a trade association, for example, depends on
mutual help rendered, good prices offered, provision of tips and other news, and credibility.
We must take the primary experience of permanence and flux of Chinese tradition to
come to grips with the understanding of how social cultural has been instituted, manage the im-
pacts of these changes including the surprises. Mickunas indicates the following: becoming and
permanence are correlated and a harmonious way. Permanence is li, designated as internal and
chi designated as external.. Becoming is not contained in the permanence but rather in change.
Spontaneity and life is permanence; li is order and law, while chi is flux (outer).
Flux in the tradition is passion and outside normal psyche. Illness is also considered to be
abnormal. Tao (the way) makes clear evil arises from artificial, self-assertion. Confucius re-
gards flow as co-extensive with civilizing forces and destructive flow is regulated to selfishness.
160
Chinese government has to be mindful of Chinas past and renewal of Confucius elements of
change and stability; its polarities with the dialectical notion of Capitalism and instrumental
exchange in with its own teleology. However, the background of Confucius is guanxi ties or
knots in which doors can be opened - front, back or side doors.
In order to see more clearly some impacts of modernization in China we may wish to
consider or makes thematic the notion of time in pre-modern China. Time and space were in-
terdependent in which space is filled with diverse meaning to place and time appears linked to
place and events. The notion of situation, circumstance and the moment are critical factors to
the everyday notion in Chinese life. Making lived history as opposed to histography is tied to
an occasion and to each occasion in some way. There are ritual practices to mark the begin-
ning and the cycle to take on, as is often the case with a lunch or dinner. The host sets the cues
for the start of the meal with a discussion of the food and the end of the meal by making a toast,
standing up and the meal is over.
Business meetings are choreographed with introductions of each person at the table as
well as those sitting against the walls of the room. If somehow an American (foreigner) abruptly
says I know who you are and intending a sign of respect, the Chinese host will continue with
the ritualized introduction until completion, regardless of the guests familiarity. Meetings are
often scheduled prior to lunch or dinner, coupling occasions with particularly ritualized hospita-
lity. Food time is not business time: that is mixing ritual and occasion.
Because ganqing determines the favorability and sustainability of guanxi, creating and
maintaining ganqing is critical. To build up ganqing, sharing social activities such as drinking,
working or studying together is a prerequisite. Two persons may have a guanxi base, but not
necessarily build guanxi relations. Whether or not a guanxi base (e.g., alumni of the same colle-
ge) can be transformed into a guanxi relation depends upon ganqing. To strengthen guanxi,both
parties must cultivate ganqing.
Xinren (trust), another important element of guanxi, is closely associated with ganqing.
The greater the ganqing between two people, the greater the xinren. The reason why guanxi
between family or clan members is the strongest and most sustainable relationship is that Chi-
nese generally do not trust people outside their families. Parties establishing guanxi based on
voluntary, social factors must demonstrate positive feelings of empathy for each other in order
to overcome this initial distrust. They will have to work actively to maintain the relationship by
fully reciprocating favors received and help each other any time one of them is in particular need
of assistance. This will build a personal connection and loyalty that can be relied upon. When
two strangers want to do business, an intermediary is imperative. The intermediate agent acts as
a catalyst by using his or her mutual friendship and xinren for each of the other two parties to
bring them together. Since Western business relationships do not necessarily contain his personal
element, Westerners tend to underestimate the time it takes for Chinese to assess the suitability
of a close, personal, non-familial relationship.
Trust is often considered the ability to rely on another because he or she is perceived as
credible or competent. Trust between business persons entails expectations of reliability and
competence in the delivery of expected outcomes. Trust is an especially important element of
161
a sustained guanxi relationship because it limits the likelihood of opportunistic behavior in a

business environment that lacks established rules of law or traditionally does not enforce laws
strictly. When two parties trust that each will treat the other in a fair, reliable, and competent
manner, then their continued transactions will be facilitated even in the absence of legal and
contractual mechanisms for monitoring veracity. For example, a Chinese businessperson who
develops a reputation for breaking promises to sell at a certain price will be forced to deal on a
cash basis with suppliers. This suggests the importance of always being seen as trustworthy. In
one study, 85 percent of managers whose companies were doing business in China reported that
trust was an essential condition for guanxi and that guanxi could not exist without trust.
While Westerners attach value to systems trust, Chinese business practices emphasize
personal trust. Systems trust, as in a financial institution, assume that the system is functioning
correctly; trust is placed in the system, not specific individuals. Agencies which form part of the
system function to generate trust, reduce reliance on people, and make personal guarantees dis-
pensable. For instance, when two parties sign a written agreement, they are depending on the law
to bind the contract. Although this does not imply that personal trust can be altogether dispensed
with, the involvement of an external agency decreases the personal element of transactions and
enhances objectivity. Therefore, systems trust is associated with professionalism and rationa-
lism. In a modern context, the adoption of the more impersonal form of systems trust supposedly
increases the legitimacy of transactions.
Chinese managers view personal trust as more important than systems trust. Credibility
refers to trust between individuals which bypasses a third agency. Risks are borne by the indi-
viduals and cannot be absorbed by an external agency. The contract between individuals is not
bound by an external body. Although credibility is embedded in social relations and subject to
social sanctions, its underlying principle grants those who apply it a sense of moral superiority
over those who rely on systems trust because it is presumably based upon the honesty and integ-
rity of individuals. Nevertheless, over time, there may be a gradual shift from personal trust (e.g.,
verbal agreements) to systems trust (e.g., written contracts) as Chinas economy opens up and
as the legal framework develops. The institution of personalism, once established, is resistant to
change. Its persistence goes beyond functional necessity. Many young Chinese managers have
already accepted Western standards of professionalism and the idea that systems trust is superior,
as espoused by powerful MNCs. Trust is often placed only where there is sufficient control over
the reliability of a system. This control must function independently of the personal motives of
any one individual at any given time. This ensures that one does not need to personally know
those who have knowledge one needs. Some Chinese firms have therefore begun to mimic cer-
tain structural features of foreign MNCs in recent years.
Silence of Guanxi
The function of the guanxi mechanism is becoming more differentiated with the value of
the foreigner as an addition of guanxi networks. The guanxi networks function both as entrep-
reneurial as well as intermediaries. High prestige guanxi networks can also operate as fixers,
change agents and creators of doors which is the ultimate guanxi.
162
The silence of guanxi is grounded in tribute and security which functions despite burea-
ucratic governmental legitimacy or individual lack of access to resources. Tribute is a part of the
gift economy where gifts are given due to ones prestige and effectiveness. It does not assume
as an objective giving a gift in return. The gift, on the part of the giver, does not expect favor
in return. It presumes a form of insurance against threat to ones security, This is not Derridas
free gift which offers a justification and a pedigree for the ideologist of duty freed, wherein
one is not obligated to give, charity, philanthropy or to be taxed to assist the less fortunate caught
in the urban welfare economy.
Derrida loses sight of the surplus value at both the material and symbolic level of the
gift economy. The guanxi network functions as a a closed protectorate environment. For Derri-
da, apparently this is no more, no potency in the economy. While that is quite true of instru-
mental contracts yet in practice no contract however instrumentally worded does not function
by the word alone but must exceed the words to carry out the instrumental. Apparently Derrida
missed the concept of work to rule which organized labor has used for years as an absolute
work slowdown, crippling the organization: labor only does that which the contract spells out as
their duties in black and white, no more.
Ok, No Problem
Chinese have often been believed as a community living with a conflict-avoidance cultu-
re. Their communication behaviors seem to have been inspired and hence guided by the common
belief among participants to save each others dignity and the sacred social attribute known as
mianzi or lian face. This is a concept derived from the teachings of the most prominent and
respected Chinese philosopher Confucius. Cheng believes that Confucianism, with its theory
and practice, no doubt, is the unequivocal ideological background and foundation of the concept
of face and face-work in the Chinese language. This concept of face requires that all parties
involved in a communication transaction be obliged to save each others face as the positive
social value they will effectively claim for themselves and this is an image of self delineated in
terms of social attributes. As a social attribute, face is gained on loan from society. This com-
mon belief harmonizes their interactions, because face work among Chinese is conceptualized
as a typical Chinese conflict preventive mechanism and a primary means to cultivate harmonious
human relations in Chinese social life. Therefore, to understand the philosophical values of face
would be of crucial necessity for every member of the society by which they can maintain the
harmony of their life.
The values of the concept of face in Chinese culture seem to have been extracted from the
most basic value of jen, a concept related to humanness and its associated meanings such as
humanity, benevolence, goodness, and virtue. Contained in this jen are all warm human
feelings that qualify and constitute an ideal person, who will always be considerate about others.
In other words, understanding of and then practicing jen implies an acceptance of the principle
of shu reciprocity, in which a person will feel and as if experiencing to be the other person by
putting him/herself in the others shoes, so that his/her empathy toward others will spring accor-
163
dingly. Putting ones self in anothers shoes requires a reflexive orientation and inter-kinaesthe-
tic affectivity in order to feel like another.
According to Confucianism, a perfect ideal human being, reached through self-cultivati-
on, can only be accomplished when the following five relationships are completely understood
and then achieved:
(1) The relation of closeness (like the emperor-subject relation);
(2) The relation of righteousness (as found in the emperor-subject relation,
(3) The relation of distinction (as in husband and wife relation);
(4) The relation of hierarchy (as evident in elder-younger relation); and
(5) The relation of faithfulness (as in friend-friend relation). Self-cultivation itself is de-
termined by the norms and values of xiao (filial piety), di (brotherliness), li (prop-
riety), and de (moral integrity). It is into de that the concepts of lian and mianzi are
attached.
Four characteristics attached to the concept of face in Chinese: relational, communal/
social, hierarchical, and moral are identified. Relational concept of face is fixedly understood
by Chinese as the principal means and mechanism that governs and prescribes all their social
conducts so that it guarantees the harmony of their human relations. This relational conception
is considerably contradictory with that of Western understanding of face concept which is of
highly rational model in nature transactional and emphasizes individualism on its prime per-
spective. Ho further noted that the Western mentality, deeply ingrained with the values of in-
dividuality, is not one which is favorably disposed to the idea of face, for face is never a purely
individual thing. Face, according to Jia, is both the goal and the means for strengthening and
expressing harmonization of human relationships among men in society and the central empha-
sis is on the human relationship instead of impression management.
Face is also said to have a communal/social value. This characteristic is rooted on the
idea that face is a public censure, the loss of which will severely negatively affect the status
of the loser in the community. Therefore, when someone has a feeling of fear of losing face, that
strongly indicates that he/she is aware of the force of social sanction. To keep face means that
the normal functioning of the community will prevail, and the member who retains it is accep-
ted as a full member of the community.
The Chinese concept of face is grounded upon a hierarchical perspective into which age
and blood bonds, relational hierarchy within the family and the hierarchical nature of the family
are attributed. This is for example evident in the naming practices that prevail in the Chinese
communities. According to Scollon and Scollon, the concept of hierarchy is obviously noted in
the concept of face, and not taking this characteristic into account might lead to a misunderstan-
ding of the concept.
Morality is inherently attached to the concept of face in Chinese culture. In Hus observa-
tion, face finds its place as the sign of respect of the group [of people in the society] for a man
with a good moral reputation and the loss of it could mean a condemnation by the group for
immoral and socially disagreeable behavior. Seen from this perspective, the loss of face can be
equated with the loss of morality of the loser.
164
In interpersonal communication, the principles of jen bind all participants to believe that
their interest may conflict with others, and it therefore has to be compromised. When taken up
appropriately according to the principles, both parties will be felicitous, i.e. feeling good and
satisfied because their interest is respected and attended to by the other. In most cases, though
not always, this feeling is achieved through politeness or limao. Into this are included a set of
sometime not-negotiable guidelines, sometimes non-negotiable, for people to follow.
As a concept, limao might be perceived reasonably similar in the minds of the Chinese,
although its realizations might vary because these will depend on individuals understanding,
which might have been influenced by some other external factors such as age, education, life
experience, intensity of interactions with other members, social status, and so on. The present
study was aimed to investigate the influence of those external factors on the realizations of limao
in various speech acts. In particular, this study was oriented to portray and explain the on-going
changes experienced by the Chinese in the way they view mianzi face as a traditional concept
in relation to limao politeness in the new order of the world that is changing. If we believe
that the development of information technology has made the world even become smaller and
borderless, then we will have to admit that there will no single element of the world remain sta-
tic. Needless to say, this will also affect the values and norms adopted in our life. This natural
process will therefore have to be viewed not as a threat to the traditional values but rather as a
complementary that necessitates it to happen.
Silence, Emptiness, The Mystery Of China Is Revealed
In the Phenomenology of Zen, Mickunas describes the phenomenon of emptiness in Zen

practice which aims to:
Open a direct insight into the event constitution of Being-Nothing,
permanence-flux, eternity-time and thus being the very transcendental subjectivity, the
genesis of all evidence in accordance with the things
themselves in light of what is experienced as it present itself of itself.
While the lived awareness either of permanence of flux is a bedrock constitutive of any
concretion in action, it reveals another component that is constitutive of two awareness. This
other is the more primal intentionality which does not extend any particular object or events
and hence cannot be ascribed noetic character. Silence within the dominant mythic context
refers to the ineffable mystery or polar tension mutually intensifying each pole. With Contem-
porary Radical Phenomenology silence refers to taken-for-granted background or a latency of a
background context which cannot be exhausted by any single event, word, gesture, etc.. Silence
in this sense goes to the heart of Chinese guanxi as a network of mutually implicator fact struc-
tures, an open field with its own logic.
A quanxi mechanism coheres and or hangs together makes sense because it participates
in the network of possibilities tactly assumed by a frame of reference. Any form of expression
with the silence already evokes a particular constellation of possibilities and implications. The
165
field can be tensed in a way with expectancies and those who live here and swing into focus an
activity or action. Francois Jullien has pointed to this silence or emptiness as the great boun-
dary in-between requires of it or its equilibrium. He also refers to this as quiescence of China
aesthetics, cynically called blandness. Addressing the new guanxi requires we operate at an
atemporal level of experience. The transcendental shift is the ground modulations of awareness,
of emptiness as original modes of symbolization. This shift is creative of unity in difference and
their surface intentionalities. While the quest for permanence has promoted philosophy, cultural
studies, etc. to adopt the moebius strip, the Klein bottle or the torous to justify the new logic. It
seems that the proto-symbol is the spherical network. An example of the symbolic is the recent
Chinese New Year, starting on January 23, 2012 the Year of the Dragon (or the serpent). The
serpent within a two-dimensional space forms a circle and swallows itself. However, in three
dimensions, the serpent flows unbroken backwards into its own auto-figuaration which is a ho-
le. The hole is the serpents mouth, yet it is neither a hole in a container nor a hole in which
it is contained. It is the hole produced by a recursive act of self-containment that integrates the
container and its contents and gives way a holeness.
The process of self-containment is enacted thought the dimension of depth. This is not
a regression to a simple self-identity. The Dragon refers to itself, but also to what is other and
a boundary is crossed. This boundary is not a boundary but a paradox: crossing-over to the far
side, yet at once remains on the nearside.
References:
1. Aziz, E. A. 2000. Refusing in Indonesian: strategies and politeness implications. Unpublished

Ph.D. thesis. Department of Linguistics, Monash University.
2. Blum-Kulka, Soshana. 1982. Learning how to say what you mean in a second language: a
study of the speech act performance of learners of Hebrew as a second language, in Applied
Linguistics. 3,
3. Brown, P. and S.C. Levinson. 1987. Politeness: some universals in language usage. Cambridge:
CUP. Chang, H. and R. Holt. 1994. A Chinese perspective on face as inter-relational concern
in S. Ting-Toomey (ed.). The challenge of facework. Albany: SUNY.
4. Cheng, Chung-ying. 1986. The concept of face and its Confucius roots in Journal of Chinese
Philosophy.
5. Cited according to: DeWoskin Kenneth J. A Song for One or Two. Music and the Concept of
Art in Early China. Ann Arbor : C enter forChinese Studies, The University of Michigan ,
1982,
6. Goffman, Erving. 1959. The presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Doubleday.
7. Gu, Yueguo. 1990. Politeness Phenomena in Modern Chinese, in Journal of Pragmatics.
14,
8. Hall, D. L., Ames R.T. Thinking Through Confucius. Albany : State University of New York
Press, 1987;
166
9 Ho, D.Y. 1976. On the concept of face, in American Journal of Sociologist. 81, pp:867-
884.
10. Hu, Hsien Chin. 1944. The Chinese Concept of Face, in American Anthropologist.
46(1),
11. Ide, Sachiko. 1989. Formal form and discernment: Two neglected aspects of universals of
linguistic politeness, in Multilingua. 8/2-3
12. Zhuljen F. Traktat ob efektivnosti. Moskva, Sankt-Peterburg, 1999
TheChinese classics with their abbreviations:
Xcz Xi ci zhuan (A Great Commentary from The Book of Changes): Yijing (transl. by
J. Legge). The Chinese-English Bilingual Series of Chinese Classics, Hunan chubanshe,
1994.
joi pilota
konfucis garepeba: CineTis tradiciuli identobebi
Tqven ucxoeli xarT, Tqven ver gaigebT

CineTs, Tu ara xarT Cineli
dumili, sicariele, CineTis misteria gamoaSkaravebulia Zenis fenome-

nologiaSi, aRwerilia sicarielis fenomeni Zenis praqtikaSi, rasac miznad
aqvs: gaxsnas uSualo gaciskrovneba, yofiereba araras xdomilebis konsti-
tuciaSi.
ucvleloba-mimdinareoba, maradisoba-dro da misi yofiereba, tran-
scendentuli subieqturoba, yvela utyuarobis genezisi saganTan Sesatyvi-
sobaSia. sakuTari Tavi sinaTleSi aris gamocdileba, rogorc igi warmoid-
gens sakuTar Tavs sakuTar TavSi.
cocxali ganswavluloba, mimdinareobis mudmivoba aris safuZveli
nebismieri makonstituirebeli Serwymisa moqmedebaSi, romelic avlens sxva
komponents, romelic aris makonstituirebeli ori ganswavlulobisa. es
`sxva~ aris ufro Zireuli intencionaloba, romelic ar afarToebs obieqts
an xdomilebas da, maSasadame, ar SeiZleba mieweros noetikuri xasiaTi. du-
mili dominirebuli miTologiuri konteqstis farglebSi mianiSnebs gamo-
uTqmel idumalebas an polarul daZabulobas da TiToeuli polusi urTi-
erTs aZlierebs.
Tanamedrove radikaluri fenomenologiis Tanaxmad, dumili miemar-
Teba im pirobiT miRebul safuZvels, an farul fonur konteqsts, romelic
SeuZlebelia amowurul iqnes erTeuli xdomilebiT, sityviT, qceviT da ase
Semdeg. am azriT, dumili miemarTeba Cinuri guanxi-s gulSi, rogorc urTi-
167
erTgadajaWvuli faqtis struqturis qselSi, Ria sivrceSi Tavisi sakuTa-

ri logikiT.
SesaZleblobaTa qselSi monawileobiT guanxi-s meqanizmi faqtobrivad
gulisxmobs mimarTebaTa freims. gamoxatvis nebismieri forma dumilis meS-
veobiT ukve iwvevs SesaZleblobebisa da implikaciebis gansakuTrebul kon-
stelacias. sivrce SeiZleba daiZabos molodinebiT da isic, vinc cxovrobs
aq da qanqarasaviT qanaobs aqtiurobis an aqtivobis fokusSi. fransua Juli-
anma miuTiTa am dumilze an sicarieleze, rogorc did sazRvarze `Si-Soris~
(in-between), rac moiTxovs mis wonasworobas. igi aseve mianiSnebs Cinuri esTe-
tikis uZraobas, rasac cinikurad Tavazianobas uwodeben.
axal guanxi-ze mimarTva moiTxovs Cvens moqmedebas gamocdilebis ara-
temporalur doneze. transcendentaluri cvlileba aris ganswavlulobis,
sicarielis modulaciis (cvalebadobis), rogorc simbolizaciis modelis,
safuZveli. es cvlileba aris SemoqmedebiTi erTianoba gansxvavebaSi da mis
zedapirul intencionalobaSi, radgan mudmivobis ZiebiT dakavebulia fi-
losofia, kulturuli kvlevebi da ase Semdeg. rogorc Cans, proto- sim-
bolo aris sferoseburi qseli. simboluris magaliTia 2012 weli, drakonis
weli. drakoni wris simboloa, sadac gveli organzomilebian sivrceSi qmnis
wres da ylapavs sakuTar Tavs. magram sam ganzomilebaSi, gvelis nakadebi
ukuSeqceulia sakuTar autoniSnebiT saubarSi, romelic aris `Wrili~. Wri-
li aris gvelis piri, es ar aris Wrili, romelic yvelafers Seicavs. es Wri-
li aris warmoebuli TviTSekavebis rekrusiuli aqtiT. es aerTianebs mom-
cvel saTavsos da masSi moTavsebuls da gzas aZlevs `Wrils~. TviTSekavebis
procesi nabrZanebia azrisadmi siRrmis ganzomilebiT. es ar aris regresi
martivi TviTidentobisaken. drakoni miemarTeba sakuTar Tavs, magram aseve
imas, rac aris sxva da amiT sazRvari gadalaxulia. es sazRvari araa sazRva-
ri pirdapiri azriT, aramed paradoqsi SoreTis gadabijebiT mainc vrCe-
biT siaxloveSi.
168
mamuka doliZe
subieqti kvantur meqanikaSi da avtori Tanamedrove

polifoniur prozaSi
kvantur meqanikaSi gansakuTrebuli sicxadiT gamovlinda Semecnebis

subieqtisa da obieqtis fenomenologiuri mTlianoba. SeuZlebelia lapara-
ki mikrosamyaros Sesaxeb misi Semecnebis pirobebis gaTvaliswinebis gareSe.
aq, Cveni azriT, mkafiod ikveTeba subieqt-obieqtis erTianobis problema,
rac naTlad gamoxatulia nils boris damatebiTobis principSi.
am erTianobis dadasturebis mizniT Cven mivmarTavT kvanturi Teori-
is fenomenologiur interpretacias, romelic mikrosamyaroSi subieqtis
Seyvanas gulisxmobs. es, ra Tqma unda, sulac ar niSnavs, rom damkvirvebeli
subieqti qmnis mikrosamyaros realobas. fizikuri realoba arsebobs Tavis-
Tavad, miuxedavad imisa, akvirdeba mas adamiani Tu ara; da mainc, dakvirvebis,
anu gazomvis situacia atomur samyaroSi principulad gansxvavdeba klasi-
kur-fizikuri Semecnebis situaciisgan. is ar daiyvaneba mxolod fizikur
urTierTqmedebaze gamzom xelsawyosa da atomur obieqts Soris. atomuri
situaciis ùcnauroba~, Cveni azriT, imaSi mdgomareobs, rom aRniSnuli si-
tuacia erTgvarad `subieqtivirebulia~. gamzomi xelsawyo aq ar warmoad-
gens Cveulebriv fizikur sistemas, is TamaSobs subieqtis cnobierebis rols
atomuri obieqtis mimarT, ufro swored, warmoadgens subieqtis eqstrapo-
lacias adamianis gareT, fizikur realobaSi. aseTi ram savsebiT dasaSvebia,
radgan araTu adamianis cnobierebaSi, mTel obieqtur sinamdvileSi mimdi-
nareobs ideaTa realizaciis, sazrisebis warmoSobisa da cvalebadobis `su-
bieqturi~ procesi, ris gamoc fizikuri movlenebi ar daiyvaneba calsaxa
mizez-Sedegobriv kavSirebze, aramed gvaqvs maTi garkveuli Tavisuflebac,
rac mikrosamyaroSi atomuri procesebis indeterminizmsa da albaTur xasi-
aTSi gamoixateba.
nils bori gveubneba, rom azri ara aqvs vilaparakoT atomuri obieqtis
arsebobaze gamzom xelsawyosTan mimarTebis gareSe. es niSnavs, rom mikroo-
bieqti ganuyoflad aris Serwymuli misi Semecnebisa da gazomvis situacias-
Tan. es mosazreba subieqt-obieqtis erTianobas gamoxatavs mikrosamyaroSi.
Cveni msjeloba cxadyofs, rom boris aRniSnuli principidan gamomdinareobs
kvanturi meqanikis indeterministuli interpretacia, fizikur sidideTa
ganuzRvreloba, albaToba da korpuskularul-talRuri dualizmi, anu mik-
rosamyaros suraTis gaxleCa talRur da korpuskularul warmodgenebad.
1927 wels, kopenhagenSi, ainStainisa da boris cnobili diskusia faq-
tobriv iyo brZola kvanturi meqanikis deterministul da indeterminis-
169
tul interpretaciebs Soris. Cveni azriT, am brZolaSi gamarjvebuli ar

gamovlenila. orive interpretacia Tanabrad misaRebia kvanturi meqanikis
mimarT. Tuki gaviTvaliswinebT warmodgenili kvlevis perspeqtivas Tana-
medrove fenomenologiis Suqze, SeiZleba iTqvas, rom boris principi kvan-
turi obieqtisa da xelsawyos erTianobis Sesaxeb aucilebelia, magram sak-
marisi ar aris mikrosituaciis sruli daxasiaTebisTvis. mas unda daematos
sicocxlis fenomenologiis idea materiis TviTinterpretaciis unaris Se-
saxeb.
subieqturi yofierebis SeWra obieqtur realobaSi niSnavs imas, rom
materias (fizikur realobas) gaaCnia unari TavisTavad, adamianis Carevis
gareSe, moaxdinos sakuTari SemecnebiTi situaciis interpretacia. amitom
konkretul kvantur situaciaSi obieqturad gveZleva ara mxolod subieqt-
xelsawyos sistema, aramed is gzac, ra gziTac es situacia Tavis Tavs gviC-
venebs deterministuli an indeterministuli interpretaciis saxiT. mate-
riis aRniSnuli TviTinterpretacia yovelTvis axdens konkretul arCevans
da gamoricxavs erTi, saerTo WeSmaritebis mocemulobas kvanturi deter-
minizmis arsebobis an ararsebobis Sesaxeb.
am mxriv sainteresoa urTierTobis garkveva òrTodoqsalur~ kvan-
tur Teoriasa da edmund huserlis fenomenologiur filosofias Soris.
siZnele aq imaSi mdgomareobs, rom kvanturi Teoria Seexeba mikrosamyaros,
romelic cnobierebis gareSe, obieqturad arsebobs; huserlis interesis
sagans ki Seadgens subieqtis cnobiereba, rogorc codnis konstruqciis Si-
nagani wyaro. vfiqrobT, rom es siZnele, kvlevis gansxvavebul saganTa gamo,
moCvenebiTia. rogorc huserlis intencionaluri cnobiereba aris Ria obi-
eqturi samyaros mimarT, aseve kvantur-fizikuri situaciis obieqturobac
aris gaxsnili subieqturi yofierebis winaSe. es ormxrivi Riaoba saSuale-
bas gvaZlevs davsaxoT kvanturi fizikisa da fenomenologiuri filosofi-
is erTmaneTTan Sexvedris sasazRvro sfero, sadac subieqtis da obieqtis
erTianoba Tavisuflebisa da indeterminizmis samyaros Seqmnis.
ganuzRvrelobis intervalSi, albaTur mikromovlenaTa TamaSis scena
trialebs erTaderTi invariantis garSemo: es aris kvantur-meqanikuri eq-
sperimentis mTlianoba, anu xelsawyosa da mikroobieqtis erTianoba, rac
SeiZleba SevadaroT arsobriv invariants fenomenologiuri reduqciis
sferoSi, anu huserlis intencionalur cnobierebas.
iseve, rogorc intencionaluri cnobiereba mizandasaxulia gare obi-
eqtis mimarT da misi arsebobis obieqturi sazrisis gauqmebiT (brWyaleb-
Si CasmiT) daadgens Tavis Tavs, rogorc am sazrisis qmnadobis subieqtur
process, aseve kvanturi gazomvis procesic, fizikuri reduqciis gziTa da
boris principis mixedviT, auqmebs xelsawyosgan damoukidebeli mikroobi-
eqtis arsebobas, raTa gadmoitanos es arseboba im subieqturi yofierebis
170
mamuka doliZe _ subieqti kvantur meqanikaSi da avtori
Tanamedrove polifoniur prozaSi
wiaRSi, sadac gvaqvs subieqt-obieqtis dinamikuri erTianoba, kvanturi eq-

sperimentis mTlianobis saxiT.
amitom, Tuki intencionaluri cnobiereba fenomenologiuri reduq-
ciis gziT isev daadgens obieqtis arsebobis sazriss, kvanturi gazomvac,
fizikuri reduqciis gziT, qmnis atomuri obieqtis fizikur azrs.
yovelive es kidev erTxel adasturebs Cvens mosazrebas, rom kvanturi
situacia ontologiurad `subieqtivirebulia~ da rom gamzomi xelsawyo am
situaciaSi TamaSobs intencionaluri cnobierebis rols mikromovlenaTa
mimarT.
kvanturi fizikis fenomenologiuri interpretacia saSualebas gvaZ-
levs gavafarTovoT Cveni Tvalsazrisi da davadginoT erTgvari analogia
kvantur-meqanikur Semecnebasa da Tanamedrove polifoniur prozas Soris,
romlis arsebiT saxeobas `cnobierebis nakadis~ literatura Seadgens. ase-
Ti analogia ar aris SemTxveviTi, radgan erTi da igive fenomenologiuri
meTodi intuiciurad gamoiyeneba rogorc kvantur fizikaSi, atomuri obi-
eqtis modelirebis mizniT, aseve Tanamedrove prozaSi, mxatvrul saxeTa Se-
moqmedebis dros.
analogia kidev ufro gamWvirvale xdeba klasikuri da kvanturi fizi-
kis dapirispirebis fonze.
klasikur fizikaSi sidideebi, kanonebi da principebi dadgenilia obi-
eqturi codnis uzogadesi da abstraqtuli sistemis mimarT, romelic abso-
luturi subieqtis ideiT sazrdoobs. mTeli klasikur-fizikuri samyaro
Semecnebis obieqtad aris qceuli Zveli racionalizmis am absoluturi ker-
pis winaSe. amitom codna fizikuri realobis Sesaxeb mTlianad obieqtivire-
buli da Caketilia materialuri sinamdvilis farglebSi. cdis monacemebi,
saTanado sidideebi da kanonebi pretenzias acxadeben asaxon cdisgan damo-
ukidebeli obieqtebi da TavisTavad mimdinare procesebi.
klasikur racionalizmTan Tanaziar literaturaSic mxatvruli rea-
loba obieqtivirebuli da fsiqologiuri realizmis farglebSia Caketili.
Semoqmedi gareSe momentia sakuTari qmnilebis mimarT. mas absoluturi da
yovlisSemZle subieqtis gvirgvini amSvenebs, rac imas niSnavs, rom avtori
mTlianad akontrolebs Tavis nawarmoebs da qmnis gmiris moraluri Sefase-
bisa da siuJetis warmarTvis erTian pozicias, raTa Tavis nebaze ganaviTa-
ros yoveli saxe da moagvaros nebismieri konfliqti Txrobis dramaturgi-
aSi. mxatvruli obieqtivaciis Sedegad, nawarmoebi sinamdvileze orienti-
rebuli, racionaluri da erTiani sistemis formas iZens, saxeebi da gmirebi
baZaven realur pirebs, xolo ambavi ise viTardeba, TiTqos is namdvilad
xdebodes. avtori am SemTxvevaSi ubralod mogviTxrobs `namdvilad momxda-
ri~ istoriis Sesaxeb.
absoluturi subieqtisa da yovlisSemZle avtoris swored aseT kerps
amsxvrevs fenomenologia kvantur meqanikaSic da polifoniur prozaSic.
171
absolutis taxtidan Camogdebuli subieqti mikrosamyaroSi Sedis gazomvis

procesis saxiT. igi aRar ubrundeba racionalizmis klasikur qimeras, ami-
tom SeuZlebelia misi ganyeneba da gatana kvanturi realobis miRma, raTa
subieqtma garedan, mTlianobaSi ganWvritos es realoba da daikavos ato-
mur movlenaTa ganzogadebisa da codnis sistematizaciis erTiani pozicia.
gansxvavebiT klasikuri fizikisgan, mikrosamyaroSi aRara gvaqvs fizikuri
realobis obieqturi, erTiani da mkacrad determinirebuli suraTi gvaqvs
ganuzRvreloba, gvaqvs albaToba, gvaqvs indeterminizmi, ris gamoc fizi-
kuri aRwera ixliCeba mikromovlenaTa urTierTgamomricxav, korpuskula-
rul da talRur warmodgenebad.
imave situacias vakvirdebiT Tanamedrove polifoniur prozaSic.
subieqti-avtori CarTulia Tavis nawarmoebSi cnobierebis nakadis
saxiT. avtoris xma imdenad Serwymulia personaJis xmasTan, rom SeuZlebe-
lia avtoris xmis gamorCeva, misi SemoqmedebiTi procesis diferencireba
da gatana mxatvruli realobis miRma, raTa mweralma garedan dainaxos Ta-
visi nawarmoebi da daikavos mxatvrul saxeTa ganviTarebisa da siuJetis
warmarTvis erTiani, avtoriseuli pozicia. subieqtis SeWra mxatvrul re-
alobaSi imas niSnavs, rom nawarmoebi ar warmoadgens mxolod Semoqmedebis
Sedegs, igi sakuTari qmnadobis subieqtur processac moicavs Tavis TavSi.
fenomenologiuri intuiciiT STagonebuli qmnileba Serwymulia im sulier
aqtivobasTan, cnobierebis im intenciasTan, saidanac is aRmocendeba, ro-
gorc warmosaxvis nayofi. fantaziis am warmonaqmnis genezisSi xorcielde-
ba fenomenologiuri reduqcia. nawarmoebis Sinaarsi Tavsdeba brWyalebSi.
amieridan gauqmebulia misi pretenzia obieqtur arsebobaze rogorc gare
samyaros mibaZvis, aseve gmiris Sinagani, fsiqologiuri realobis Cvenebis
TvalsazrisiT. amitom, Seqmnilia ganuzRvrelobis sivrce, absurdis situ-
acia, sadac nawarmoebi Tavis Tavs aCvenebs, rogorc pirobiTobas, rogorc
TamaSs. gancda iseTia, TiTqos bolomde axdilia nawarmoebis farda da cno-
bierebis scenaze naCvenebia TamaSis is qvecnobieri, faruli wesebi, romle-
bic mis literaturul pirobiTobas qmnian.
yovelive es aSkarad mogvagonebs fenomenologiuri subieqtis SeWras
kvantur meqanikaSi, rac iwvevs fizikur sidideTa albaTobas da ganuzRvre-
lobas mikromovlenaTa TamaSis scenaze. msgavsad kvanturi fizikisa, aqac
irRveva mxatvruli realobis obieqturi forma, Cndeba SemoqmedebiTi Tavi-
sufleba, Cndeba indeterminizmi, Cndeba ganuzRvreloba da personaJTa mra-
valxmiani kamaTi polifoniur JReradobas iZens.
sagulisxmoa, rom Tanamedrove literaturis analogia kvantur meqa-
nikasTan garkveulad exmianeba kvlevis axal Sedegebs sityvier xelovneba-
Sic, kerZod, àvtoris sikvdilis~ faqts da mxatvruli teqstis TviTmoZra-
obis princips.
172
***
Cven mier damyarebuli analogia ar aris filosofiis tradiciuli gza
kategoriebis mixedviT ganazogados, erTi mxriv, specialuri mecniereba
fizika, meore mxriv ki, literaturuli xelovneba. am ganzogadebaSi ikar-
geba is ganumeorebloba, is specifikuri arsi, rac am sferoebs ganasxvavebs
erTmaneTisgan. sakiTxisadmi fenomenologiuri midgoma, anu msgavsebis Zie-
ba gansxvavebaTa SenarCunebis gziT, niSnavs imas, rom Tavad fizikis, kvantu-
ri meqanikis wiaRSi movZebnoT iseTi Teoria da principi, romlebic Tavisi
siRrmiTa da masStabiT gascdeba fizikis farglebs da filosofiuri ganzo-
gadebis perspeqtivas Seqmnis.
Cveni azriT, es aris kvanturi Teoria da damatebiTobis principi. Ta-
vad am principis avtori nils bori aRniSnavda, rom idea damatebiTobis Se-
saxeb SesaZloa Sors gascdes atomuri fizikis farglebs da gavrceldes
kulturis sferoSi. boris swored es mosazreba gvaZlevs saSualebas gava-
farTovod damatebiTobis principi, rogorc istoriul-kulturuli feno-
meni, CamovayaliboT kvanturi fizikis fenomenologiuri koncefcia da amis
safuZvelze warmovaCinoT analogia kvantur meqanikasa da mxatvrul lite-
raturas Soris.
filosofiis zogadi poziciidan Tu SevafasebT, aseTi analogia ar
aris SemTxveviTi. gamokvlevam aCvena, rom fenomenologiuri filosofiis
erTi da igive meTodi intuitiurad gamoiyeneba rogorc kvantur fizikaSi
atomuri obieqtis modelirebis dros, aseve Tanamedrove, e.w. `cnobierebis
nakadis~ polifoniur literaturaSi, mxatvruli saxis qmnadobis dros. fi-
zikur da mxatvrul realobaTa gansxvavebis miuxedavad, orive SemTxvevaSi
moqmedebs fenomenologiuri azrovnebis principi subieqtis da obieqtis
ganuyofeli erTianobis Sesaxeb. kvlevis Semdgomma gaRrmavebam aCvena, rom
swored subieqt-obieqtis fenomenologiuri erTianoba ganapirobebs kvan-
turi Semecnebis (gazomvis) situaciis mTlianobas, mikromovlenaTa alba-
Tur xasiaTs, korpuskularul-talRur dualizmsa da indeterminizms.
albert ainStainTan diskusiis dros nils bori sagangebod xazs usvam-
da, rom kvanturi SemecnebiTi situacia imdenad mTliani da ganuyofelia,
rom azri ar aqvs vilaparakoT atomur nawilakze, rogorc TavisTavad arse-
bul obieqtze misi gazomvisa da Semecnebis pirobebis gaTvaliswinebis gare-
Se. rogorc vaCveneT, swored boris am gamonaTqvamidan logikurad gamomdi-
nareobs subieqtisa da obieqtis ganuyofeli erTianobis idea.
Semdgomma kvlevebma gamoavlina, rom msgavsi fenomenologiuri er-
Tianoba iqmneba `cnobierebis nakadis~ polifoniur prozaSic. Tuki aq su-
bieqtad miviCnevT mxatvruli nawarmoebis avtors, xolo mxatvrul obi-
eqtad personaJs, avtorisa da gmiris am mimarTebaSic subieqt-obieqtis
mTlianobas vRebulobT. aseTi erTianobis gamo, avtoris xma xSirad erwymis
173
personaJis xmas, xolo es ukanaskneli araerTgzis arRvevs mxatvruli saxis

sazRvrebs da gvevlineba nawarmoebis avtoris rolSi.
rogorc kvantur meqanikaSi, aseve `cnobierebis nakadis~ literatura-
Si, subieqti CarTulia ara abstraqtulad, mecnieruli cnebebisa Tu mxat-
vruli principebis sistemis saxiT, aramed igi `SeWrilia~ Tavis saazrovno
sivrceSi, rogorc cnobierebis nakadi, rogorc cocxali, SemoqmedebiTi
procesi, romelic, erTi mxriv, qmnis kvanturi obieqtis fizikur azrs, meo-
re mxriv ki, iwvevs avtoris da personaJis ganuyofel erTianobas.
daskvnis saxiT SeiZleba iTqvas, rom Tanamedrove mecnierebaSic da li-

teraturul xelovnebaSic, Semecnebis da Semoqmedebis sagnebi emsgavsebi-
an erTmaneTs. subieqtisa da obieqtis erTianobis ZaliT, maT eniWebaT Ta-
visufali neba. am nebayoflobiT miswrafebaSi isini gadadian materialuri
samyaros sazRvrebs da qmnian axal, àraklasikur~ realobas, romelic yo-
velTvis Riaa cnobierebis winaSe da rogorc intencionaluri fenomeni, arc
arsebobs Tavis SemoqmedebiT procesTan, Tavis subieqtur yofierebasTan
erTianobis gareSe.
yovelive es saSualebas gvaZlevs SeviyvanoT kvantur meqanikaSi arapi-
rovnulad mocemuli subieqti, romelic gviCvenebs mikrofizikuri realo-
bis fenomenologiur Riaobas adamianis cnobierebis winaSe.
literatura:
1. kakabaZe zurab, rCeuli filosofiuri Sromebi, gv. 10-229. baTumi, `SoTa

rusTavelis universiteti~, 2012 w.
2. nils bori, atomuri fizika da adamianuri Semecneba, moskovi, 1961, gv. 40-
43, 139-148.
3. hiuti vladimeri, damatebiTobis cneba da codnis obieqturobis problema,
talini, 1977.
174
MAMUKA DOLIDZE
The Subject in Quantum Physics and the Author in Modern Polyphonic

Fiction
Summary
The aim of our investigation is to use Husserls phenomenological approach and Bohrs
quantum conception to explain the polyphonic style of literary works. We assert that the occur-
rence of analogy between Bohrs conception and the ~polyphonic style in literature was not
coincidental since this analogy had a philosophical ground; i.e. both areas use the same pheno-
menological approach - one deals with the construction of the object of science and the other
- with the creation of an artistic form.
Phenomenological approach shows, that the reflection of premise of mind anticipates the
reflection of objects and events of cognizable world. Premise of mind includes the possibility
of knowledge, i.e. the possibility of correspondence between external things and the nature of
thinking. According to it, a physical object should be considered in integrity with the conditions
of cognition, which determine the possibility of such correspondence. Therefore, the physical
object, taken in this integrity, is unique, since it is determined by irreversibly changing consci-
ousness.
Bohrs understanding of quantum theory meets this phenomenological requirement. The
famous scholar emphasized an indivisible coexistence of a subject and an object when speaking
about the impossibility of considering the atomic object apart from its measurement conditions.
Consequently, unlike classical physics, we observe the subjects penetration into the
quantum area. Therefore, the description of atomic world disintegrates into two independent
(wave-particle) parts and instead of a single, integrated form we obtain polyphonic pictures of
physical events. When moving from one picture to another, subjective conditions irreversibly
change without having a common integrating ground underneath. The subject takes part in the
construction of the quantum object not as a transparent, immaterial mirror, reflecting the atomic
world, but as a special form of existence, which gives quantum particles a physical meaning.
The subjects consciousness is regarded as a vital essence, but not as an absolute, all-powerful
mind - the determining basis of classical physics.
Now, let us trace a link between the construction of a physical picture and forms of fic-
tion. When substituting a scientific subject by the author of fiction, two different forms of sub-
ject-object relation arise. If a literary work implies the author as an omnipotent subject, it means
that the author controls and fully determines his work, solving every conflict within it. Here the
author acts as a narrator, who knows everything about the story and tells the facts as if they
have happened in reality. Therefore, such an impartial author is beyond the story and his work
175
acquires an objective form of reflection of the actual events. We denote such literary works
~single base forms.
The subject-object relation reminds the picture of classical physics, where physical ob-
jects and interactions are given in the objective form of being, as if they were independent from
the subjective conditions determining the physical objects. These conditions are considered be-
yond the physical picture.
Unlike classical physics, quantum picture is constructed according to the phenomenolo-
gical method. That is why, the mind participates as a subjective existence here and instead of
physical object we have the concept of quantum phenomenon, which is an indivisible result of
subject-object interaction.
If a writer is in a position to apply the phenomenological method to fiction, the situation
similar to that in quantum sphere occurs. Phenomenological approach considers a literary work
as a phenomenon, which implies in it the process of its creation. This work involves the aut-
hors stream of consciousness. The author neither personally nor objectively, but as a subjective
process of creation, penetrates into the story and the work loses its strictly objective form. The
author does not intend to present the facts in such a way as if they have really taken place. All
these results make an impression that a real stream of the authors consciousness runs through
his creation, causing the deletion of borders between the characters and the author.
Thus, once entering his creation, the author destroys its objective form and the work ac-
quires the conditional nature of invention. Strictly speaking, the story shows itself in an unde-
termined area, lying between the forms of reality and invention, for no objectification act takes
place in regard to the external world, or in the inner world of the author. On the whole, a subjects
penetration implies a loss of certainty and clarity of the objective content of a fiction. Absurdity
and uncertainty become features of artistic reality as it is in the case with quantum reality. Absur-
dity reflects not a chaotic state of external world, but uncertainty of our consciousness. Thus, a
subjects penetration disintegrates a single-base form of fiction, mutually independent parts of
which organize a polyphonic structure of creation, where the authors single consistent position
is never revealed. The creator neglects verisimilitude of the story, or, using phenomenological
language, takes its objectivity in brackets, and a literary work, instead of reflecting the ~real
facts, shows itself as a phenomenon of consciousness in its existential dimension.
We would like to explain once more, how we understand the authors penetration into
his novel.
As for fiction, a phenomenologist should raise an issue of correspondence between reality
and invention. When bringing up the correspondence issue, he, at the same time, puts questions
about the limits of such relationship and assumes the possibility of disparity between art and
reality beyond these limits.
Finally, the phenomenologist evaluates the creative work as being independent from the
external world.
But such an evaluation is somewhat dangerous. The thing is that while freeing itself from
external reality, the work of fiction may find itself in the field of the authors psycho-emotional
gravity. The existence of a creative work, as an independent phenomenon, means its ~disincli-
176
nation~ neither to the external objects nor to the authors subjective world. Therefore, the writer
has created the area of uncertainty and obscurity within his story to maintain the middle, inde-
pendent position of his work between the external world and the psychological subject. This
concept means subject-object phenomenological integrity, for, due to this uncertainty, there is
no distinct border between the subject and the object, between the author and the object of his
imagination. This is what an authors subtle penetration into the fiction implies.
Now, to illustrate our conception, we would like to consider Dostoevskys novels (~De-
mons~, first of all). The writer creates an impression that he knows about his story no more than
the characters do. The authors voice is one of the voices among others. Denying the omnipotent
author, absorbing him as one of the voices, the work seems to be ~hanging in the air. Therefore,
the dispute among the voices is endless; it may be interrupted, but not completed, for there is no
common position to resolve the conflicts. This fact shapes the polyphonic structure of his novels
and a literary work acquires the nature of an independent artistic phenomenon.
The same effect of the authors penetration can be found in Joyces prose. Therefore, the-
re is no distinct border between the characters of Ulysses. One character sometimes speaks
as another, whose voice intermixes with the voices of the others and so on. We think that it is a
phenomenological approach that was used by J. Joyce.
The stream of the authors consciousness seems to penetrate into his work. Because of
this penetration the writer manages to move in a subtle way from one character to another and
by doing so, gives to his works a conditional nature of invention.
The subjects penetration into the story was the main principle used by Marsel Prust. The
author for him is a sequence of mutually independent selves. Therefore, the past is unreachable
for the memory, for it (i.e. the past) existed with the unique, irreversible self, which is lost fo-
rever. Because of the loss of self we cannot reproduce the past events. We are only able to give
the meaning of past to our present state. Thus, the writer does not imply a common ground of
consciousness beyond the novel, which determines a mutually independent and irreducible na-
ture of selves.
Finally, let us establish the analogy between the ~orthodox~ quantum theory and the pol-
yphony of modern fiction.
1a. The picture of classical physics appeals to the external position of the omniscient
subject, classical concepts are determined though the level of absolute knowledge. Therefore, as
there is a common ground of determination, classical physics exposes monologue-type, comple-
tely determined picture. This picture excludes the subject and has an objective form of descrip-
tion, as if classical events are independent of the subject.
1b. The single-based form of fiction appeals to the external position of the omniscient
author. The author creates a common ground of determination and thus resolves every conflict
within the story. Artistic reality has an objective form of expression, as if artistic events are inde-
pendent from the author and take place objectively. Here the author acts as a narrator who retells
the story as if it happened in reality.
2a. The picture of quantum physics destroys the external position of omniscient subject.
The subject, as a special form of existence penetrates into the picture of quantum reality, des-
177
troys the objective - single base of expression of physical events. Introducing the polyphonic
forms (wave-particle dualism), the subject creates an area of uncertainty, the area of subject-ob-
ject indivisible wholeness, where no distinct border between subject and object appears.
2b. The polyphony of modern fiction destroys the external position of the omniscient aut-
hor. The author, as a special form of existence, as a stream-of-consciousness, penetrates into the
story, and the latter loses its objective form of the expression of artistic events. To maintain the
middle position between the external world and the authors psychological sphere, the author
creates an area of uncertainty within the story, where no distinct border between a character and
an author exists.
Thus, the analogy between quantum theory and the polyphony of fiction is not coinciden-
tal, as it has a philosophical ground - both areas use the same phenomenological method - one
deals with the construction of the object of science and the other - with the creation of an artistic
form.
As we see, in modern science as well as in modern literature might exist similar forms of
polyphonic thinking, which denies the omniscient subject as a common ground of determination
and is based on the phenomenological principle of subject-object integrity.
178
qeTevan cxvariaSvili
ra darCa hamlets CvenTvis uTqmeli
(blumis da Sestovis versiebi)
Had I but time O, I could tell you

William Shakespeare
hamleti Seqspiris ocdaTvramet piesas Soris erT-erTi yvelaze popu-

laruli da, udavod, yvelaze skandaluri piesaa. sxvaTa Soris, moculobi-
Tac yvela sxva piersas aWarbebs. misi analizisa da interpretaciis sakiTxi
saukuneTa manZilze Tavsatexad eqcaT yyvelaze maRali rangis filosofo-
sebs, mwerlebsa Tu moazrovneebs. hamletisa da misi avtoris Sesaxeb Seq-
mnili zRva literaturis miuxedavad, piesis uprecendento eqsperimenta-
lizmi da ambivelenturoba mis xelaxal interpretaciebs iTxovs. amis das-
turi gaxlavT Cveni drois gamoCenili literaturis kritikosis harold
blumis 2001 wels gamosuli wigni hamleti poezia ganusazRvreli (Harold
Bloom Hamlet Poem Unlimited). blumi wignis SesavalSive aRniSnavs, rom 1998
wels gamosul mis wignSi Seqspiri: adamianis gamokvleva swored imis Tqma
ver SeZlo, rac yvelaze mniSvnelovani da arsebiTi iyo misTvis. Seqspiris
piesaTa konfrontaciis enigma, Tavad misi avtoris pirovnebis saidumlos
xsnis. sad dgas igi Tavis nawarmoebTan mimarTebaSi? vin aris hamleti? ris
Sesaxebaa piesa? raSi mdgomareobs Seqspiris eliptikuri Teoriis ZiriTa-
di diskursi? am SekiTxvebze pasuxi gaxlavT blumis SesaniSnavi wigni, rome-
lic Tanamedrove Seqspirologiis, rogorc dRes uwodeben, bardolatriis
(Bardolatry) ukanasknel sityvad SeiZleba CaiTvalos. mosazrebani, romelTac
hamleti gamoTqvams, xSir SemTxvevaSi ar unda gaigivdes SeqspirTan. dra-
maturgsa da princs intensiuri Teatralizmi da motivTa gansxvavebuloba
mijnavs. Seqspiri Tavis nawarmoebSi ufrosi hamletis, aCrdilis meorexa-
risxovan rols TamaSobda. hamleti arc filosofosia, arc Teologi, ara-
med brwyinvaled informirebuli Teatris moyvaruli enTuziasti. Cans, is
aSkarad met dros atarebda londonSi, globusis warmodgenebze, vidre vi-
tenbergSi gakveTilebze, aRniSnavs blumi.
blumis es mosazreba sakmaod axloa nicSes versiasTan, romelic ham-
lets dionisur adamianad miiCnevda. hamleti sulac ar azrovnebda bevrs,
ubralod Zalian sworad azrovnebda wers igi, arc gansja, arc WeSmari-
ti codna, ramdenadac sazareli sinamdvilis ganWvreta spobs yovelgvari
179
moqmedebis motivs hamletSic da dionisur adamianSic. blumi aRniSnavs:

odesRac mec veTanxmebodi zemoT xsenebul mosazrebas, magram axla mis WeS-
maritebaSi eWvi meparebao. daniis princi imdenad kritikulia, ramdenadac
SemoqmedebiTi, imdenad racionaluri, ramdenadac intiutiuri. garkveuli
TvalsazrisiT igi bibliur daviTs waagavs. Tavisi Sinagani xmis meSveobiT
meditirebs da afuZnebs axal TviT-cnobierebas.
gansacvifrebelia hamletis Temis universaluroba, mis Sesaxeb imdeni
azri SeiZleba gamoiTqvas, ramdeni adamianicaa dedamiwaze. udaod yuradR-
ebas iqcevs Temis lev Sestoviseuli egzegetika, romelic pozitivizmis
egzistencialuri kritikis originalur nimuSad SeiZleba CaiTvalos. wig-
nSi Seqspiri da misi kritikosi brandesi avtori misTvis damaxasiaTebeli
galanturi ironiiT aneitralebs JorJ brandesis yvela Sexedulebas. Ses-
tovis hamleti calsaxad gnoseologi filosofosia, romelic ganyenebul-
ma, avtonomiurma, realur yofierebas mowyvetilma azrovnebam tragediis
gmirad aqcia. bediswera gamowvevas ugzavnis adamians. nacvlad imisa, rom
adamianma miiRos gamowveva, anu yofierebis mTeli av-kargi da tanjvis gziT
saboloo gamarjvebamde mivides da bedniereba moipovos, igi gamowvevas Se-
Sinebuli gaurbis. gnoseologiis labirinTebSi moxetiale princi WeSmarit
cxovrebasTan pirvelive Sexlis Semdeg damfrTxali da dabneulia. codna,
romelic filosofiur wignebSi amoikiTxa da romliTac horaciusTan sa-
ubrebSi keklucobda, amao da ararelevaturi gamodga realur cxovrebaSi
(elsinorSi). swored amitomaa, rom mSvenieri qalis nacvlad, mis miRma moRa-
late meZavs xedavs; venera miloselis sinatifisa da mSvenierebis aRsaqme-
lad, Tvalisa da gonebis garda, gulia saWiro, romelic Rrma gancdebisTvis
gvaqvs boZebuli. sonetebSi amokiTxuli da sonetebadve qceuli siyvaruli
sabediswero aRmoCnda sabralo, Seuracxyofili ofeliasTvis. Sestovis
azriT, hamleti ar aris rwmenis raindi, radgan mas ar gaaCnia siyvarulis
unari, am grZnobis fenomenologiuri gaSla. mxolod maSin aRar darCebo-
da hamletis naTelmxilveluri unari unayofo, maSin venera ki ar iqceva civ
marmarilod, sayvareli qali meZavad, adamiani naZiralad, aramed marmari-
lodan daibadeba venera, meZavi umankoebas Seimosavs, xolo naZirala adami-
anad gardaiqmneba. hamlets ar sjera adamianobis, radgan ar icis, ra aris
siyvaruli, mas arasodes ganucdia es grZnoba. siyvaruli umal simaxinjes
aqcevs RvTaebrivad, vinem skepticizms miscemdes gasaqans.
dania sapyrobilea, samyaro savsea amgvari sapyrobileebiT. mamis aC-
rdili ki mouwodebs: sazareli ambebi moxda, daamarcxe da dasaje usamar-
Tloba, yvelafers Tavisi adgili miuCineo; magram hamlets xelebi gulze
aqvs dakrefili ara imitom, rom is saukeTesoa, aramed imitomaa saukeTeso,
rom wyevlis Tavis umoqmedobasa da uunarobas. misi Tvlemidan gamofxiz-
leba mxolod koSmariTaa SesaZlebeli da Seqspiri mouvlens mas am koSmars.
180
qeTevan cxvariaSvili _ ra darCa hamlets CvenTvis uTqmeli
aseTi gaxlavT Sestovis mier Seqmnili hamletis koncept-personaJi, rome-

lic mravalwaxnagovani problemis mxolod erT nawils aSuqebs. maRali ar-
tistizmi, usazRvro ambivalenturoba da damangreveli ironia hamletis
bunebis is arsebiTi komponentebia, romelTa gauTvaliswineblobac yovlad
dauSvebeli gaxlavT. paradoqsia, magram Sestovma Tavadac gnoseologiu-
rad gansaja hamleti da misi ontologiuri aspeqtis ignorireba moaxdina.
blumis mixedviT, yvelaze cnobili monologi: yofna-aryofna Sei-
cavs filosofiur kvanZs, yofierebisa da cnobierebis dixotomias. Seqspi-
ris memkvidreni, niutonidan moyolebuli, ganuwyvetliv ikvleven postgan-
manaTlebluri poeziis am dilemas sakiTxavi swored es aris.
sikvdilis zRvam, deda Ramis reprezentatorma unda daasrulos cno-
biereba. hamletis terminiT conscience, magram, ramdenad Sors unda wavides
poetTa gonebrivi Zala svams sakiTxs blumi. mocemulia arCevani yofie-
reba Tu cnobiereba. ori didi metafora upirispirdeba erTmaneTs. mokvda-
vi cxovrebis mRelvareba, anu yvelaferi, rac unda davkargoT da ucnobi
mxare, sikvdilis samefo, saidanac arc erTi mogzauri dabrunebula. hamle-
tis neba TiTqos kargavs qmediTobas, magram ara moqmedebis WeSmarit bune-
bas, romelic gonebis egzaltacias gulisxmobs. da sad aris es egzaltacia
monologSi? yvelgan, yovel frazaSi, TiToeul pauzaSi, romelTac cnobi-
erebis es grandi afrqvevs (1.78), dasZens blumi.
dadga dro, SevexoT erT-erT yvelaze saorWofo da mtkivneul Temas
piesaSi, romlis Sesaxebac lev Sestovis mkafio da kategoriuli mosazrebis
Taobaze zemoT ukve gvqonda saubari. cxadia, saqme exeba ofelias, romelic
blumis gansakuTrebul yuradRebasac imsaxurebs. SeiZleba iTqvas, es piesis
yvelaze gansakuTrebuli momentia. am azriT, mas konkurencia mxolod po-
loniusis mkvlelobam an rozenkracisa da gildesternis epizodma SeiZleba
gauwios. horaciuss Soks gvris zemoT xsenebuli adamainebis mkvleloba, ma-
Sin roca, hamleti ubralod, mxrebis aCeCviT kmayofildeba. harold blumi
sakmaod araordinalur daskvnas gvTavazobs: Seqspiris sibrZne im bedisgan
icavs ofelias, romelic wyalSi sikvdilze ufro daundobeli da sastiki
iqneboda, hamletze qorwinebisgan (1.44).
SesaZlebelia hamletis saqcieli danieli filosofosis, soren kirke-
goris biografiulma ambavma axsnas: ar SemiZlia viqorwino... dedis wiaRSi
gatarebuli cxra Tve sakmao aRmoCnda imisTvis, raTa moxucad vqceuliyavi
da iqve: rwmena rom mqonoda ar mimatovebda regina olseni, regina Cemi iq-
neboda. soren kirkegori ori tipis adamianze laparakobs, pirveli morCi-
lebis raindi gaxlavT, meore rwmenis. saRi azri, anu morCilebis raindi
mouwodebs adamians daiviwyos ararealurisken, ~mefis asulisken~ swrafva.
goneba marTalia, Cveni glovisa da mwuxarebis velze, sadac is gamgeblobs
da batonobs, es SeuZlebeli iyo da kvlavac miuwvdomeli rCeba. amitom is
181
adamians Seguebasa da morCilebas sTavazobs. mxolod rwmenis rainds Za-

luZs gadaeSvas absurdSi, mxolod rwmenis ZaliTaa SesaZlebeli mefis asu-
lis mopoveba. me mxolod curva SemiZlia, magram amgvari mistiuri qrol-
visTvis zedmetad mZime wonis var (4.57) ambobs kirkegori. hamleti mor-
Cilebis raindi namdvilad ar aris, mas amas ver vusayvedurebT, is mudmivad
Tavis Tavzea amaRlebuli, TiTqos sxeulidan amosuliyos. igi cnobierebis
princia, misi saboloo metamorfoza mexuTe moqmedebaSi ganxorcieldeba.
poeti svinborni, Seqspiris brwyinvale kritikosi askvnis: hamletis Sina-
gani bunebis ZiriTadi niSani umoqmedobaSi, meryeobaSi an gadawyvetilebis
miuReblobaSi ki ar mdgomareobs, aramed masSi arsebul Zlier ZalTa dapi-
rispirebulobaSi. vfiqrobT, esaa gasaRebi hamletis qarizmis da misi ma-
Rali individualobis saboloo cvlilebis. hamleti aRmoaCens, rom mTeli
misi cxovreba Zieba yofila obieqtis gareSe (mxedvelobaSi Tu ar miviRebT
mis uzomod mzard subieqturobas). es WeSmariteba hamlets ~ngrevis ange-
lozad~ aqcevs. igi sakuTar TavSi brZolebis garda, garegan borot sulsac
ebrZvis. aq blumi Zalze saintereso bibliur paralels avlebs: koWli ia-
kobi, romelic Znelia hamletis arqetipad warmovidginoT, pirispir rCeba
elohimTan (SesaZlebelia, sikvdilis angelozTan) da masTan Serkinebis Se-
degad axal saxels uxveWs israels, hamleti ki Tavis identifikacias sikvdi-
lis angelozTan axdens, mas ar ZaluZs moipovos axali saxeli (1.126).
piesac da princis piradi mgrZnobelobac CarCoebSi svams hamlets. is
metad didia imisTvis, rom tragedia iyos da sabediswero, titanuri war-
mosaxviTi literaturisTvis. blumi araerTgzis aRniSnavs, hamletis sa-
ukeTeso sasceno Tu kinoversiebic ki mis yvelaze fundamentur problemas
uvlian gverdso. miuxedavad Seqspiris dauRalavi winaaRmdegobisa sakuTa-
ri qmnilebis transcedenturobis dasamarcxeblad, igi mainc agebs brZolas
finalur scenebSi. rogorc Tomas sternz elioti aRniSnavda: esTetiku-
ri warumatebloba iqca esTetikur triumfad. Seqspiri moqmedebaSi rTavs
energiebs, romelnic ufro transcedentul STabeWdilebas qmnian, vidre
socialursa Tu personalurs. hamleti arRvevs rogorc sivrcul, agreT-
ve droiT sazRvrebsac. lirisTvis apokalifsuri xana dgeba (gavixsenoT
glosteris da edgaris saubari mTvaris dabnelebis Sesaxeb), hamletisTvis
ki droTa kavSiri darRveulia, Tumca, ara xdomilebaTa an moqmedebaTa kav-
Siri. viciT ki, rogor daivana hamletma yofierebis maRal ganzomilebaSi?
rogor mivediT am rwmenamde, ratom varT ase darwmunebulni, rom is Cven-
Tvis ibrZvis? amis mizezi SeiZleba iyos misi ganuzomeli momxibvleloba,
romlis gamoc yvelafers vpatiobT. cnobierebis uprecedento brwyinva-
leba, romelsac adamianuri cnobierebis kvintesenciad miviCnevT Seqspi-
risa da hamletis apoTeozi gaxlavT. Cven zemoTac SevaCereT yuradReba
hamletSi rwmenis naklebobaze. amis mizezi princSi mudmivi TamaSis gare-
moa; marTlac, rogorc blumi aRniSnavs, pirveli oTxi moqmedebis hamlets
182
Seqspiric emijneba. SeuZlebelia ar SevamCnioT avtoris ambivalenturoba

princTan mimarTebaSi. marTlac, zogjer is iseve gvaSinebs da gvafrTxobs,
rogorc gvxiblavs da gvatyvevebs, magram sruliad gansxvavebulia finalu-
ri scenebis hamleti, igi transcedenturobis auras moucavs. gavixsenoT
sityvebi, romliTac laertis Semorigebas cdilobs: brali mimiZRvis, la-
ert, SenTan motevebas gTxov...
sjera ki hamlets Tavisi SeSlilobis? misi SeSliloba groteskuli
dispoziciiT iwyeba da klavdiusTan brZolis erT-erT iaraRs warmoadgens.
blumis mtkicebiT, hamlets ar gadaulaxavs saRi gonebis zRvari da, miuxe-
davad amisa, igi ver xedavs simulaciis niSnebs am keTilSobilur mimarTvaSi.
hamletma es ukve gaiara, igi ukve gardaiqmna artistidan poetad, magram, Tu
nicSes davujerebT, poezia xSirad cruobs awmyosTan mimarTebaSi. hamleti
mxolod cdis laerts, es gaxlavT saSineli sicrue awmyos mimarT, romelsac
ar faravs hamletis gamanadgurebeli ironia. man mSvenivrad icis cafiqre-
buli SeTqmulebis gardauvaloba da sulierad momzadebuli Sedis duelSi.
dueli es is adgilia, sadac hamletis TviT-cnobierebac ki kargavs TviT
(self)-is Sinaarss. es gaxlavT ukanaskneli gabrwyineba hamletis didi aCrdi-
lisa, romelsac dasavlur romantizms veZaxiT. princis TviT-cnobiereba
ganivrcoba zogadcnobierebad, radgan misi TviT-cnobierebis kvdomam
aTiaTasobiT axal TviT-cnobiers unda misces dasabami.
oriod sityva fortinbrasze, romelsac savsebiT samarTlianad blumi
antihamlets uwodebs. arc klavdiusi, arc laerti da aravin sxva ar SeiZ-
leba iyos antihamleti, radgan, Tu klavdiusi amoraluria, hamleti didi
xania iqca zemoralurad. fortinbrasi miwieri samyaros warmomadgenelia,
igi ufrosi hamletis msgavsad Zlevamosili, miwaze myarad mdgomi potenci-
uri mefea. cnobilia Seqspiriseuli gamijvnebi: liri da edmundi sityvasac
ki ar cvlian erTmaneTSi; antoniusi da kleopatra ganmartoebiT mxolod
erTxel xvdebian erTmaneTs. aseTi mouxelTebelia Seqspiri, igi arasdros
axvedrebs erTmaneTs hamletsa da fortinbrassac. Seqspirma princs gulux-
vad misca ozrikTan ybedobis dro, xolo fortinbrasTan dapirispirebis
ara. arada, fortinbrasis mamis mkvleli ufrosi hamletia da isic, ham-
letis msgavsad, biZam ganaSora samefo taxts. hamleti keTilganwyobili,
lmobieri ironiiT uwodebs fortinbrass saTno da naz princs, rodesac
is poloneTis erT-erTi nawilis dasabyrobad miabijebs. aq kidev erTxel
mwvaved gaismis hamletis ironia: Cemi momakvdavi xma mas ekuTvnis (He has
my dying voice). hamletma SesaniSnavad icis, rom daniis momavali mefe swored
fortinbrasia. man xom yovelTvis Cvenze meti icis.
Seqspiris erTaderTi vaJi, hamneti 1596 wels, 16 wlis asakSi garda-
icvala, mwerlis mama 1601 wels. 37 wlis asakSi didma dramaturgma orive
dakarga. ra kavSiri SeiZleba qondes am movlenebs uSualod piesasTan? amis
Sesaxeb varauds yvelaze xatovnad jeimz joisi gamoTqvams ulises bibli-
183
oTekis scenaSi miiCnevs blumi. SaviT mosili princi, dramatuli indivi-

dumi im daskvnamde midis, rom hamleti ufro mamaSvilobis ideas glovobs,
vidre Tavad mefe hamlets. TviTon Seqspiri piesaSi yovelTvis TamaSobda
hamletis mamis aCrdils, is meorexarisxovani rolebis Semsrulebeli iyo,
mrisxane, Zlevamosili monarqis, romelTanac did monologists sulieri
TvalasazrisiT araferi hqonda saerTo.
jon beili askvnis, Tuki hamlets Cveni amgvarad monusxva SeuZlia,
igi uTuod Seqspirsac xiblavdao. safiqrebelia, rom yvelaferi, rac Seq-
spirma 1600 wlamde Seqmna, garkveuli aspeqtiT Tavs iyris princis saxeSi.
imdenad Rrmad Seiswavla hamletma sakuTari Tavi, rom cdunebas ayolil-
ni vakvirdebiT, Tu rogori arabunebrivi ZaliT vrceldeba misi ironiuli
swavleba sxvebze, im personaJebzec ki, romlebic Seqspirs gacilebiT adre
hyavs Seqmnili. ai, ras ambobs blumi: es gaxlavT hamletis triumfi Seqspir-
ze, anda Seqspiris transcedenturoba sakuTar Tavze. hamleti udavod imaSi
cdilobs Cvens darwmunebas, rom Tavis Semqmnelze meti icis (1.151). Tumca,
iqve dasZens: ramdenadac didi ar unda iyos hamleti, igi mainc marionetia
Tavisi Semqnelis xelSi (1.151). manipulirebad Tojinebs ar gaaCniaT neba in-
terpretaciis gareSe. oskar uaildi hamletis uzarmazari gavlenis inter-
pretirebisas acxadebda: `samyaroSi melanqolia gaizarda, radgan princi
sevdiani iyo~. blumis mixedviT, hamletSi ori misteria gvaqvs: Teatralu-
ri da msoflmxedvelobrivi. Teatraluri misteriis gaazreba met-naklebad
SesaZlebelia, xolo msoflmxedvelobrivi Semecneba gacilebiT rTulia.
hamletis toni ukve TavisTavad xedvaa aRniSnavs igi. hamletis xma gva-
uwyebs: is, rasac vgrZnobT da vxedavT hermetistuli gagebiT, siyvarulisa
da Zilis mdgomareobaa, usiyvaruloba da gamoRviZeba ai, ra surs hamlets.
igi TiTqos dacemulia ara moraluri an Teologiuri TvalsazrisiT, ara-
med, rogorc adamiani, egzistencialuri azriT.
hamletma yovelTvis, gansakuTrebiT ki zRvidan dabrunebis Semdeg
icis raRac, risi codnac uzomod gvinda da gvWirdeba. blumi aRniSnavs, rom
mRelvarebis gareSe verasodes ismens am sityvebs:
Jami rom mqondes...

oh, sikvdili mkacri yofila,
msgavsi mZvinvare cixismcvelis... me giambobdiT...
magram davexsnaT... horacio, vkvdebi da mas gTxov,
Sen icocxle da Seasmine Cemzed namdvili;
Cemi ambavi uTxar suyvelas, vinc ki moismens
amis Semdeg hamleti kvlav agrZelebs saubars, Tumca sabolood gaw-

bilebulebs gvtovebs, radgan, risi gagebac natvrad gveqca, bolomde uT-
qmeli rCeba. xelT gvaqvs mxolod misi toni da miniSnebebi. aq ukve aSkaraa,
rom warmodgenam dakarga Tavisi reprezentaciuli funqcia da amis nacvlad
184
TavisTavad sagnad iqca. hamleti metad aRar aris piesis monawile artisti,
igi erT-erTi Cvengani xdeba, mas Cveni TanagrZnoba da gamarTleba sWirdeba,
radgan ar surs SebRaluli saxeliT darCes. mexuTe moqmedebaSi dadebul
naZlevs igi aucileblad moigebs, radgan: raoden rTulic ar unda iyos Cem-
Tvis amgvari daskvnis gakeTeba, mainc unda aRvniSno, ambobs blumi ubad-
lo literaturis kritikosi unda iyo, rom hamleti ar giyvardes. vfiqrobT,
dro rom hqonoda, Seucnobeli, zeciuri samyaros Sesaxeb gviambobda, saida-
nac mokvdavTagan aravin dabrunebula.
miuxedavad horaciusis darwmunebulobisa, rom hamletis suli sasu-
fevlis gzasaa Semdgari, blums es molodini uadgilod miaCnia, misi Tval-
TaxedviT hamleti arc sasufevelSi, arc jojoxeTSi, arc gansawmendelSi,
arc romelsame sxva Teologiur fantaziaSi midis, igi ar imogzaurebs kaTo-
likebis, kalvinistebisa Tu luTeranebis warmosaxviT sanaxebSi. emersonis
orfiuli gansazRvrebis Tanaxmad, RmerTi nangrevebSia. rodesac ici, rom
dacemuli RvTiuroba xar, gaqroba da ganadgureba misaRebi alternativa
xdeba.
ramdeni metamorfoza ganicada hamletma, Tavdapirvelad Teatris
enTuziasti moyvaruli iyo, Semdeg artistad, aqedan ki poetad da drama-
turgad iqca. aSkarad filosofosic gaxda, amasTan nihilistic, mZvinvare
ironistic, skeptikosic... SeSlilobisa Tu salosobis zRvramdec mivida.
cnobierebis princi, ngrevis angelozi, sikvdilis sqolari, RmerTi
nangrevebSi vuwodeT, koWl iakobsa da bibliur daviTsac SevadareT, sabo-
lood ki axal adamad warmovsaxeT. vfiqrobT, kvlavac SesaZlebelia am Camo-
naTvalis gagrZeleba da, udavod, paradoqsia, magram arc erTi am saxelTa-
gani ar aris hamletis SemTxvevaSi urTierTgamomricxavi, uadgilo.
hamleti WeSmaritad dramis sasaflaoa. Seqspiri gaeqca mas, raTa da-
ewera otelo, mefe liri, makbeti, antoniusi da kleopatra, magram
verc erTi dramaturgi ver tovebs sasaflaos miwas da Cveni Rrma subieq-
turobac kvlav mis Tavze farfatebs. amis simbolo ki iorikis Tavis qalaa.
iago Tavad agebs Tavis izolacias, hamleti ki Tavadaa izolacia. hamletis
Seucnobeli samyaro, misi gaqrobis, aryofnis saelCo anadgurebs sazR-
vrebs, romelTac misi drama sasceno ganzomilebaSi unda moeqciaT. Tuki
Seni cxovrebis gzas WeSmaritebisken svlis gzad aqcev, maSin unda mokvde
kidec WeSmaritebisaTvis dasZens nicSe. qristian morwmuneebs gaaRizi-
anebT Cemi Semdegi mosazreba, magram ar vici sxva ra vuwodo im faqts, rom
RmerTia hamletSi da misi piriT Tavad RmerTi laparakobs (1.131) acxa-
debs blumi.
marTalia, hamletic mtveria, magram yvelaze rafinirebuli mtveri
adamistur mtverTa Soris. da Tu is axali adamia, misi siaxlis niSnebi se-
kularizirebuloba da destruqciuloba unda iyos. hamletma cnobierebis
185
kvleva sabolood erT mTavar SekiTxvamde daiyvana: ra aris adamiani? igi

mSvenivrad acnobierebs, rom cnobierebis gaqroba absolutur Tavisuf-
lebas gulisxmobs. niSnavs Tu ara es ganRmrTobis ideasTan miaxloebas?
vfiqrobT, udavod unda niSnavdes. radgan cnobiereba, iseve rogorc msof-
lmxedveloba, mokvdavi, dasazRvruli adamianis unaria. isini ar sWirdeba
mxolod absoluturi unaris mqone subieqts, mxolod RmerTs da is erTa-
derTia sruliad Tavisufali.
maS, risi Tqma ver moaswro CvenTvis hamletma? ra aris is, rac sikeTesa
da borotebaze, moralsa Tu amoralobaze maRlaa? da ratom arCia amis Se-
saxeb dumili Seqspirma? vfiqrobT imitom, ratomac dostoevskim Tqva uari
daewera Tavisi saboloo nawarmoebi romani qristeze, ratomac did in-
kvizitorSi macxovari dumiliT pasuxobs bralmdeblis sityvebs. hamlets
RmerTze surda eambna CvenTvis da dadumda, radgan geniosiss da uflis pi-
rispir Sexvedra winaswar gamzadebul carier sivrces iTxovs, romelSic si-
nergiulma Zalebma WeSmaritebis Semecnebis SesaZlebloba unda dagvanaxon.
niSnavs Tu ara hamletis martooba misi avtoris izolirebulobasa da
simartoves? vin iyo Seqspiris uaxloesi megobari? savaraudod, ara didi
daTvi jonsoni, romelsac, cxadia, yovelTvis jabnida xolme maxvilsityva-
obaSi da arc keTilganwyobili dreitoni. Seqspiri misi hamletis msgavsad
umowyalod martosul, kiTxvebis gamCen, idumal adamians gavs. ...Seqspiri
Tavisi yvelaze genialuri protagonistisgan izolacias eZebs, sCans imis-
Tvis, rom Tavisi dramatuli reprezentaciis sazRvrebi daadginos (1.139).
didma dramaturgma daadgina, rom ar aqvs aseTi sazRvrebi. maS, ra aRmoCe-
na gaakeTa rogorc pirovnebam? savaraudod, ara tragikul muzasTan kon-
frontacia, radgan ramdenime komediis Semdeg igi kvlav tragedias ubrun-
deba. ar aqvs dasasruli hamlets da arc hamlets, radgan ar aqvs dasasru-
li Seqspirs (1.154) acxadebs blumi.
literatura:
1. Harold Bloom. Hamlet: Poem Unlimited (2001);

2. Harold Bloom. Shakespeare: The Invention of the Human (1998);
3. . c (1898);
4. Sren Kierkegaard The Writers Diary
5. uiliam Seqspiri. hamleti.
186
KETEVAN TSKVARIASHVILI
What Remained Untold by Hamlet
(Versions by H. Bloom and L. Shestovs)
Summary
After more than four centuries, The Tragical History of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark,
remains the worlds most advanced drama matched by its importance and experimentalism. As
Harold Bloom, the indispensable literary critic argues: Ransacking Hamlet is a losing pro-
cess. If, as with an open box, you could turn the entire play over and empty it out, its scattered
contents would defy reassembly into the spunkily coherent entity that goes on sublimely tran-
scending the sum of its components (1.134). So, in this little article we have tried to obsess
different opinions about Shakespeares geniality.
Hamlet: Poem Unlimited is Blooms attempt to discover the mystery of both Prince
Hamlet and the play, how both the prince and the drama are able to break through the conventi-
ons of theatrical mimesis and the representation of character, to make us question the very nature
of the theatrical illusion. H. Bloom takes us through the major soliloquies, scenes, characters,
and action of the play, to explore the enigma at the heart of the drama, which is central to its
universal appeal.
We would also like to remember, a much earlier philosopher, little known today and dear
even in the academic world, Lev Shestov (Lev Isaakovich Schwarzmann). This is partly because
his works have not been easily available. Partly the specific themes he discusses are unfashio-
nable and foreign. However, he did influence the writers such as Albert Camus (who wrote
about him in Le mythe de Sisyphe), Benjamin Fondane and notably Emil Cioran. Shestov was
also highly admired and honored by Nikolai Berdyaev and Sergei Bulgakov in Russia, Jules de
Gaultier, Georges Betaille and Lucien Levy-Bruhl in France, and D. H. Lawrence, Isaiah Berlin
and John Middelton Murry in England. His fundamental work Shakespeare and his Critic Bran-
des the author is focused upon the philosophic gnoseological aspect of Hamlet. Shestov turns
his attention to the existential criticism of rational self-consistent and self-evident. In fact,
the philosopher of Despair suggests us the existential criticism of positivism. Shestovs Ham-
let is a victim of gnoseology. He is a thinker, who has lost the real ability of love, so he ignores
uniqueness and lovingness of real life. The main reason for Hamlets tragedy is a lack of feelings
and belief. The rationalistic and scientific influence, the education and scholarly wisdom he
got in Wittenberg (a German Protestant institution, famous for Martin Luther) turned out to be
irrelevant for real life, for humans ontological being. And here we suggest an example from the
biography of a Danish philosopher Soren Kierkegaard (so akin to him), about his love story with
187
Regine Olsen. Kierkegaard seems to have genuinely loved Regine, but was unable to reconcile
the prospect of marriage with his vocation as a writer, his passionate and constant melancholy.
Regine was shuttered by his rejection. Kierkegaard attempted to quell this through actions which
made it appear that he did not care for her at all and made it seem that Regine had broken it off
If I have a tiny belief, Regine wouldnt leave me (11.37) she would be mine.
According to Bloom: Despite his (Hamlets) passion in the graveyard, we have every
reason to doubt his capacity to love anyone, even Ophelia. He does not want or need love: that is
his lonely freedom, and it provokes the audiences unreasoning affection for him. Shakespeares
wisdom avoided the only fate for Ophelia that would have been more plangent than her death-in
-water: marriage to Hamlet the Dane (I.43).
So, Shestov says: Hamlet cant love, Bloom assumes that he doesnt want or need love,
but there is a point of view akin to both of them: Hamlet is a hero of consciousness. What is the
power of Hamlets salosizm or madness? What is the power of Hamlets mind over the uni-
verse of death, or sea of troubles? That indeed is the question. Being, or consciousness, is given
the choice: suffer stoically, or take arms against the sea and thus end sooner, consumed by the
currents, whose great pitch constitutes height, our enterprises cannot attain (I.35).
What has he chosen? If you think your way through to the truth, then you must die of it:
that is Nietzschean interpretation of Hamlet: The spirit indeed is ready, but the flesh is weak.
Hamlet thrusts aside his natural fear of annihilation, in order to center upon what Bloom judges
to be a bitter rhetorical question: What isnt to leave betimes? the precise moment of annihila-
tion does not matter, because we know nothing about anything (or anyone) we leave behind. For
Hamlet himself, death is not tragic, but an apotheosis.
What Jesus still is to many believers, Hamlet still is to many skeptics: the concept figu-
re. Shakespeare, whatever his personal convictions, didnt compose either as believer or skeptic.
The passion of Hamlet seems more Davidic than Christ like. Charisma gloriously expires
upon stage, to our edification.
As Harold Bloom argues: breaking from his sources, Shakespeare gave the same name
to the Hamlets, father and son, but they are as different as, say, Yahweh and Jesus; it is absurd to
compare the warrior-king with the God of Abraham, or the Son of Man with the prince of skep-
tics. And yet both comparisons may be rendered absurd by Hamlets enigmatic apotheosis.
During the whole drama, the prince of Denmark frightens us as much as he attracts us,
and yet Hamlet of the final scenes is very different. An aura of transcendence surrounds him.
Hamlets will loses the shadow of self while continuing to expand as a consciousness. What we
have called Western Romanticism is the last embellishment of Hamlets great shadow, cast off to
become a thousand other selves. (1.147)
Shakespeares dramatic representations have no limits. What did Shakespeare as a person
find? Bloom thinks he found himself and recoiled from the finding. There is no end to Ham-
let or to Hamlet, because there is no end to Shakespeare. He had discovered the nature of the
selfsame, the full secret of how to represent an identity.(1.152)
188
Shakespeare needs silence to prepare an empty space for synergic forces in order to ran-
sack the truth.
The scholar of death, the hero of consciousness must die, so must die his self- con-
sciousness, to establish new consciousnesses of million others. Only Hamlets mind can defend
him against its own terrible force.
Had I but time as this fell sergeantp - we can experience the feeling of frustration
caused by the untold part. Bloom suggests that if he had time, he could tell us something about
the undiscovered country, from whose bourn no traveler returns.
189
bioeTika
BIOETHICS
arqimandriti adami (axalaZe)
sulieris primati sekularizebul kulturul sivrceSi.

bioeTikuri ganzomileba
adamianis problema mravalwaxnagovania da amouwuravi. am problemis

Teoriuli struqturisa da infrastruqturis konstruirebis variantu-
loba metad mravalferovani, yvelanairic ki SeiZleba iyos. am mravalfe-
rovnebisa da yvelanairobis ganmapirobebeli faqtori msoflmxedveloba-
Ta heterogenurobis maRali xarisxia.
amitomac aucileblad vTvliT, gamovTqvaT Cveni mosazreba imis Tao-
baze, rom bioeTikuri, biosamedicino, anTropologiuri da sxva globaluri
problemebis gadawyvetis done da specifikuroba, Tanamedrove fundamen-
turi mecnierebebisa da maTze dafuZnebuli postindustriuli teqnolo-
giebis mier gamowveuli Sedegebis xasiaTi mniSvnelovanwiladaa damokide-
buli (a) TviT sazogadoebis sulier-zneobriv mrwamsze, (b) imaze, Tu romel
Rirebulebebs miiCnevs igi umaRlesad, (g) Tu ramdenad drouli, brZnuli,
moraluri da adekvaturi iqneba misi reaqcia eTikuri dilemebis gadasawyve-
tad, anu, Tu ragvari iqneba misi bioeTikur-anTropologiuri msoflmxed-
veloba [2, 50].
Tanamedroveobis bioeTikuri da sxva fundamenturi problemebis ga-
dawyveta warmoudgenelia mxolod racionalisturi msoflaRqmis safuZ-
velze: cdilobs ra gaxdes erTaderTi sazogadoebrivi TvalsazrisiT mniS-
vnelovani Zala, adamianis goneba SesaZlebelia Tavad iqces civilizaciis
sulier-zneobrivi krizisis gaRrmavebis mizezad.
bioeTikuri TvalsazrisiT kacobriobas dRes krizisis fazaSi uxdeba
arseboba [1, 45; 2, 185].
Tanamedrove msoflios bioeTikuri krizisuli ekzistencia xasiaTde-
ba imiT, rom gadauwyvetelia embrionuli Rerovani ujredebis gamoyenebis,
fetaluri Terapiis (zogierT qveyanaSi, magaliTad, ruseTSi), abortis, ev-
Tanaziis, agreTve transplantologiasa da genur medicinasTan dakavSire-
buli da kidev mravali sxva bioeTikuri dilema [1, 9-10; 5, 7; 6, 11; 7, 2].
190
sulieris primati sekularizebul
arqimandriti adami (axalaZe) _
kulturul sivrceSi. bioeTikuri ganzomileba
globaluri krizisi kidev ufro Zlierad gamomJRavnda adamianis

klonirebis ideaSi, romelmac safrTxe Seuqmna adamianis Rirsebas, unika-
lurobasa da pirad xelSeuxeblobas, gaxada ra adamianis memkvidreobiToba
gareSe Carevisagan daucveli.
Tanamedrove medicinaSi dramatulad ikveTeba, upirveles yovlisa,
adamianis mier sxeulis janmrTelobasa da sicocxlis gaxangrZlivebaze (e.
w. ~xorciel ukvdavebaze~) zrunva adamianis sulis moTxovnilebaTa igno-
rirebis fonze (transplantologia, genuri medicina, krionika, xelovnu-
ri reproduqciuli teqnologiebi da a. S.). raRa Tqma unda, aseTi gageba si-
cocxlis, sikvdilisa da ukvdavebisa ewinaaRmdegeba ara marto qristianul
da mTel rig sxva religiur msoflmxedvelobebs, aramed adamianis ontolo-
giur arss, mis zneobriv normebs, umaRlesi sulieri Rirebulebebisadmi da-
mokidebulebas, adamianis RvTaebriv daniSnulebas [2, 45].
civilizaciis ekzistencia rRvevad biosferoSi, kacobriobis sulie-
ri da inteleqtualuri cxovrebis sul ufro mkacri da Rrma krizisis niS-
nebis gamoCena iZleva prognozirebis saSualebas: Semdegi faza iqneba katas-
trofis faza (apokalifsi).
amgavri prognozi aqtualurs xdis katastrofis prevenciis sakiTxs,
romlis ganxilvisas gasaTvaliswinebelia, rom gza planetaze kacobriobis
cxovrebisa da moRvaweobis yvela sferos humanizaciisa da harmonizacii-
saken gadis im cvlilebebze, romelnic ganxorcieldeba inteleqtualuri
moRvaweobis iseT mniSvnelovan arealebSi, rogorebicaa: adamianis sicocx-
lesTan damokidebuleba, Rirebulebebis ierarqia, sicocxlis filosofiis
moRvaweobis filosofiasTan mimarTeba da misT.
zemoTqmuli safuZvelia im SesaZleblobisa, romelic gulisxmobs
krizisis fazis Secvlas kaTarzisis faziT. es ukanaskneli drosa da sivrce-
Si SezRuduli, magram adamianis rogorc amqveyniuri, ise maradiuli cxov-
rebisaTvis metad aucilebeli da Rirebuli procesia.
vinaidan Cveni kvleva Tavisi SinaarsiT anTropologiuricaa, upriania
gavixsenoT, rom amgvari kvleva moicavs (unda moicavdes) adamianTan dakav-
Sirebul sakiTxTa mTel wyebas:
adamianis arsi da buneba,
adamianis warmoSoba,
adamianis daniSnuleba am qveyanaze,
adamianis adgili samyaroSi,
adamiani, rogorc biologiuri arseba dedamiwaze cocxal orga-
nizmTa ierarqiis umaRlesi safexuri,
adamianis cxovelqmedebis yvela gamovlineba (dabadeba, zrda,
ganviTareba, sikvdili, jamnmrTeloba, sicocxle, avadmyofoba,
reproduqcia da a. S.),
191
adamiani socialur-istoriuli moRvaweobis subieqti,

adamiani sulieri moRvaweobis subieqti,
adamiani, rogorc kulturuli moRvaweobis subieqti,
adamiani, rogorc metafizikuri arseba,
adamiani, rogorc sayovelTao idealuri sawyisis
matarebeli [1, 32-33; 3, 54-55; 4, 129].
Cveni kvlevis Sedegad gamovlenilia Semdegi konceptualuri Tezise-
bi, romelTac veyrdnobiT da romelTaganac gamovdivarT bioeTikuri dile-
mebis arsis mecnieruli da qristianul-anTropologiuri kvlevebis dros.
es saxelmZRvanelo Tezisebi gaxlavT:
1. Tezisi adamianis RvTaebrivi (kreacionistuli) Seqmnis Sesaxeb;
2. Tezisi adaminis bunebis dualizmis (orbunebovnebis) Sesaxeb;
3. Tezisi adamianis transdisciplinuri kvlevis arsebiTi mniSvne-
lobis Sesaxeb misi sociumTan, civilizaciasTan, bunebasTan,
makrokosmosTan mimarTebis mTeli sirTulis gaTvaliswinebiT;
4. Tezisi mecnieruli da metamecnieruli anTropologiuri gamok-
vlevebis aucilebeli paralelizmisa da SesaZlo integrirebis
Sesaxeb;
5. sulieris primatis koncefcia bioeTikur da anTropologiur
kvlevaSi [1, 35].
swored es ukanaskneli warmoadgenda winamdebare naSromis kvlevis sa-
gans.
gansaxilveli koncefcia warmoadgens ontologiuri WeSmarite-
bisa da samarTlianobis reanimaciis mcdelobas dRevandel mecnierul
azrovnebaSi. migvaCnia, rom igi safuZvlad unda daedos Cvens msoflmxed-
velobriv orientacias idealistur-materialistur azrTa WidilSi, suli-
erisa da sxeulebrivis Sewonilobis, maradiulisa da warmavalis urTier-
TmimarTebaTa zeciur da miwier ganzomilebebSi arsebobis Sefardebis gan-
sazRvraSi.
Cvenive koncefciis mixedviT sulierisaTvis upiratesobis miniWeba da
materialuris ganZarcva primatis ~dafnis gvirgvinisagan~ arsebuli pro-
katastrofuli msoflmxedvelobriv-aqsiologiuri tendenciebis realu-
ri alternativaa Cveni civilizaciis humanizaciisa da prognozirebad mo-
mavalSi apokalifsuri finalis prevenciis procesSi.
Cven im civilizaciaSi vcxovrobT, romlis genezisis erT-erT mTavar
Zalas sekularizacia warmoadgens. Tu jer kidev me-19 saukunemde kultu-
ras safuZvlad edo religiur saZirkvelze aRmocenebuli da Camoyalibe-
buli msoflmxedveloba, uaxles droSi religias daaTmobines Tavisi fun-
damenturi mdgomareoba da jer xelovnebis, mecnierebisa da filosofiis
192
sulieris primati sekularizebul
arqimandriti adami (axalaZe) _
gverdiT miuCines adgili erT rigSi, rasac mohyva religiis gandevnis Tan-
mimdevruli procesis ganxorcieleba racionaluri azrovnebis, mecniere-
bis, saero eTikis, politikuri da ekonomikuri berketebis meoxebiT. es pro-
cesi dRemde sul ufro mzardi intensiurobiT warimarTeba [3, 51; 7, 1-8].
sekularizacia zesTasofliuris gaamsofliurobiskenaa mimarTuli:
is, rac eklesiasa da rwmenis sferos ganekuTvneboda, TandaTanobiT maTgan
damoukidebeli (xolo Semdgom maTTan dapirispirebuli), saero xdeba. Tu
Tavdapirvelad es sasuliero ierarqiis Zalauflebisa da saeklesio sakuT-
rebis sakiTxebs Seexeboda, mogvianebiT am procesma adamianTa rogorc su-
lieri da zneobrivi, ise inteleqtualuri, kulturuli da socialuri arse-
bobisa da moRvaweobis yovelgvari gamovlineba moicva.
sekularizaciis procesis nayofiT gansakuTrebulad daixunZla Ta-
namedrove biomedicinis sulier-zneobriv problemaTa da dilemaTa ~anti-
natvris xe~. maTi daZleva antisekularizaciiT anu sakralizaciiTaa SesaZ-
lebeli.
rwmenasa da codnas, mecnierebasa da religias, racionalursa da ira-
cionalurs Soris xidebis gadeba, rac Cven mier bioeTikis, rogorc mecnie-
rebis, umniSvnelovanes funqciadaa aRiarebuli, Tavisi arsiT sakralizaci-
is procesis arsebiTi nawilia.
amdenad, uaxloes momavalSi bioeTikam Tavisi kuTvnili adgili unda
daimkvidros msoflio kulturis sistemaSi, xolo bioeTikurma msoflmxed-
velobam Tavisi roli Seasrulos civilizaciis ganviTarebis procesebSi.
Cveni azriT, bioeTikuri kvleva orientirebuli unda iyos biomedici-
nis sakacobrio problemebis imgvari gaazrebis, Seswavlisa da analizisaken,
romelic fundamenturi bioeTikuri kategoriebis (sicocxle, sikvdili,
avadmyofoba, janmrTeloba) mravalmxriv (bunebismecnierul, humanitarul,
filosofiur, Teologiur, istoriul, kulturologiur da a. S.) gamokvle-
vebzea dafuZnebuli. amasTanave igi unda eyrdnobodes adamianis mTliani
pirovnebis, misi orbunebovnebis gagebas RmerTTan, samyarosTan, bunebas-
Tan, sazogadoebasTan, civilizaciasTan mimarTebis gaTvaliswinebiT.
adamianis arsis, sicocxlisa da sikvdilis, avadmyofobisa da janmrTe-
lobis Sesaxeb amomwurav codnas ver iZleva verc sabunebismetyvelo (maT
Soris samedicino-biologiuri), verc humanitaruli mecnierebebi. ufro
metic, am cnebaTa met-naklebad amomwuravi definiciis misaRebad dRis wes-
rigSi dgeba sakiTxebi, romelTa gadawyveta scildeba saerTod mecnierul
sferos da moiTxovs Rrma da yovelmxriv metamecnierul (filosofiur,
saRvTismetyvelo, metafsiqologiur da a. S.) kvlevasa da gaazrebas.
bioeTikuri ganzomilebis realiaSi samedicino da biologiur cnebaTa
arsis kvlevis gnoseologiur process mTeli inter- da transdisciplinuri
codnis kritikuli analizisa da sinTezis gziT Cven vuwodebT samedicino
193
da biologiuri cnebebis bioeTikur kategoriebad transformacias, xolo

TviT procesis meTodologias am transformaciis teqnologias [1, 31-32].
Cvenma kvlevam gviCvena, rom mecnieruli codnis Serwymis procesi ara-
mecnierulTan rogorc zogadad, ise bioeTikuri azrovnebis genezisis pro-
cesSic, kerZod, dakavSirebulia meTodologiur problemebTan _ gansxva-
vebasTan mecnieruli da aramecnieruli Semecnebis meTodebsa, formebsa da
misT. Soris.
magaliTisaTvis moviyvanT adamianisa da samyaros warmoSobis sxvadas-
xva Teoriis momxreTa Soris diskusias, romlis wiaRSic xSirad cdiloben
saRvTismetyvelo da mecnieruli azrebis urTierTdapirispirebasa da Se-
darebas. amgvari mcdeloba yovelTvis kraxiT mTavrdeba, radgan Secdomaa
ori gansxvavebuli genezisis ideebis Sedareba, saWiro da SesaZlebeli mxo-
lod maTi Sejereba da Serwymaa.
erTi mxriv, biosamedicino cnebaTa Sesaxeb arsebuli yovelgvari
codnis integracia sruliad akmayofilebs im moTxovnilebebs, romelTac
ayenebs am cnebaTa transdisciplinuri definiciebis SemuSavebis amocana,
magram, meore mxriv, gasaTvaliswinebelia, rom azrovnebis amgvar sistema-
Si ar arsebobs erTi aucilebeli komponenti, romlis gareSec warmoudgene-
lia am sakvanZo samedicino cnebaTa fundamentur bioeTikur kategoriebad
transformaciis procesis fenomenuri gaformeba. es komponenti gaxlavT
sakiTxis aqsiologiuri gaazreba zogadsakacobrio, RvTaebriv, adamianur,
erovnul, socialur, kulturul, eTikur RirebulebaTa sistemebSi.
swored RirebulebebTan dakavSirebuli problemebia umniSvnelova-
nesi yvela im mecnierebisaTvis, romelic swavlobs adamians, sazogadoebas.
aseT mecnierebaTa ricxvs ganekuTvneba bioeTikac da biomedicinac. Rire-
bulebiTi safuZvlebis rRvevas garduvalad mivyavarT krizisamde. es exeba
rogorc pirovnebas, ise sazogadoebas, ers, eTnikur, religiur, sxva kul-
turul da socialur jgufebs, mTels kacobriobas [7, 1; 8, 9].
aseTi krizisis ilustracias warmoadgens bioeTikur koliziaTa far-
To speqtri, romlis winaSec dgas dRes kacobrioba da TiToeuli Cvengani
da romlisganac Tavis daRwevas xels Seuwyobs sulieris primatis aRiareba
kulturul sivrceSi.
literatura:
1. axalaZe v. m. bioeTikis genezisi da misi roli biomedicinisa da jandacvis

sistemis ganviTarebis Tanamedrove etapze: avtoref. dis. ... med. mecn.
doqt.: 14.00.33. Tb., 2003. 48 gv.
194
arqimandriti adami (axalaZe) _ sulieris primati sekularizebul
2. arqimandriti adami (v. axalaZe). damiani bioeTikur drosa da sivrceSi.

Konrad Adenauer Stiftung, 2010. 250 .
3. .. //
/ . .. , .. , .. . .1.
.: , 2001. .48-67.
4. . . //
/ . . . , . . , . .
. .1. .: , 2001. .123-135. .
5. Archimandrite Adam -Vakhtang Akhaladze. Parents and children: surrogate paradigm of
modernity // Georgian Medical News. 2011. - 6 (195). . 7-10
6. Peris C. Gestational surrogacy: Could be a way to reproduction? Pros and Cons // Georgian
Medical News. 2011. - 6 (195). . 11-15
7. Engelhardt, H. T.Jr. The culture wars in bioethics revisited // Christian Bioethics. 2011. V.
17, 1. P. 1-8.
8. Iltis A.S. Bioethics and the culture wars // Christian Bioethics. 2011. V. 17, 1. P.
9-24.
ARCHIMANDRITE ADAM (AKHALADZE)
Supremacy of spirituality in secularized cultural world.

Bioethical observation
Summary
Decision of bioethical, biomedical, anthropological and other types of global problems is

highly depended on: a) spiritual-ethical belief of the society, b) values, that the society considers
to be the most indispensable, d) timely, wise, moral and adequate reaction of the society when
faced with the resolution of ethical dilemmas, - (i.e. what kind of bioethical-anthropological vi-
sion would be generated within the society).
Mankind enters the critical phase from the bioethical point of view.
Bioethical critical existence of the modern world can be explained by the fact that vario-
us biological dilemmas connected with the utilization of embryonic stem cells, fetal therapy (in
some countries, e.g. Russia), abortion, euthanasia, transplantology and other types of bioethical
dilemmas connected with genetic medicine, are still unresolved.
Upsurge of civilization in disintegrating biosphere, signs of deep and severe crisis in spi-
ritual and intellectual life of mankind, give us the possibility to prognosticate: next phase will be
the phase of catastrophe (apocalypses).
195
However, theres the chance to replace the phase of crisis with the phase of catharsis. Be-
ing restricted in time and space, the phase of catharsis is the most necessary and valuable process
for both terrestrial and eternal life of a human being.
Due to the fact that our investigation according to its content is anthropological as well, it
should cover the number of issues that are related to a human being.
The essence and nature of a human,
The origin of a human,
Destination of a human on the earth,
The place of a human in the universe,
Human, as a biological creature the highest level in the hierarchy of living orga-
nisms on the earth,
All revelations of human destination (birth, growth, development, death, health, life,
illness, reproduction and etc),
Human the subject of social-historical creativity,
Human the subject of spiritual creativity,
Human, as the subject of cultural creativity,
Human, as a metaphysical creature,
Human, as the bearer of the universal ideal origin.
During the scientific and Christian- anthropological investigations of the essence of bio-
ethical dilemmas we rely on the following theses:
1. Thesis about divine (creationistic) origin of a human;
2. Thesis about the dual nature of a human;
3. Thesis about the essential importance of trans-disciplinary investigation of a human
considering the whole complexity of his relation with the environment, society, civi-
lization, nature and macro-space;
4. Conception of supremacy of a human in bioethical and anthropological investigati-
on.
Precisely the last thesis represents the subject of our investigation.
The given conception represents the attempt of reanimation of ontological truth and equ-
ity in modern scientific ideology.
Secularization is the main force that promotes the genesis of our civilization.
The tree of spiritual-ethical problems and dilemmas of biomedicine is heavy with the fru-
its of secularization process and the only way to deal with them is through anti-secularization
or sacralization.
Bridge must be built between the belief and knowledge, science and religion, rational and
irrational this is the main function of bioethics and the integral part of sacralization process.
In the nearest future bioethics must take its appropriate place in the system of world cul-
ture and bioethical ideology must play its role in the development processes of civilization.
In the reality of bioethical space gnoseological process of investigation of the essence of
medical and biological conception through the critical analysis and synthesis of the whole inter
196
arqimandriti adami (axalaZe) _ sulieris primati sekularizebul
and trans-disciplinary knowledge, is called bioethical transformation of medical and biological

conceptions into categories, and the methodology of the process itself is called the technology
of transformation.
Our investigations show that the merging process of scientific and non-scientific know-
ledge, in general, and in the process of the genesis of bioethical ideology, is connected with
methodological problems, with the difference between scientific and nonscientific methods of
perception, their forms and etc.
It must be taken into consideration that such system of ideology is deprived of essential
component its axiological perception of the issue in the systems of common, divine, human,
national, social, cultural and ethical values.
Precisely the problems which are related to human values are the most significant for tho-
se sciences the main subject of which is a study of a human, a society in general. Bioethics and
biomedicine can be included in the list of such sciences. Destruction of human values leads us
to crisis. It refers to both a human and society, as well as to nation, ethnical, religious and other
cultural and social groups, to the whole mankind.
Wide specter of bioethical collisions were facing today is the illustration of such crisis
and the only way to overcome it can be found through recognition of spiritual supremacy in our
cultural space.
197
anastasia zaqariaZe
ANNO DOMINI siberis fenomeni
araferia sibereze Zlieri

grigoli RvTismetyveli
gasuli saukunis ocian wlebSi daweril frensis skot ficjeraldis

mcire zomis moTxrobaSi ~benjamin baTonis idumalebiT moculi ambavi~ (The
Curious Case of Benjamin Button) aRwerilia marTlacda uCveulo ambavi adamia-
nisa, romelic Rrmad moxuci daibada da Semdeg daiwyo gaaxalgazrdaveba.
erTi SexedviT, es aris fantastikurad ararealuri istoria, magram dakvir-
vebuli mkiTxvelisaTvis masSi ixsneba realuri Temebi adamianuri yofiere-
bisa. es patara moTxroba mogviTxrobs, Tu rogori rTulia adamianisaTvis
iyo is, rac aris, ar iyo sxvebis msgavsi, ramdeni absurduli problemis wina-
Se dgeba rodesac sxvadaa qceuli, `sxvaa~, `gan-sxva-vebulia~. dro moTxro-
bis gmiris biografiaSi bolodan ukan, finalidan dasawyisisken datrialda.
ukuRma datrialebuli sicocxlis tragedia tragediaa adamianisa, ro-
melic ar aris siberiT datvirTuli garegnulad moxucs aravin aRiarebs
axalgazrdad. mis winaSe ixsneba sityva siberis saSineli meore mxare. er-
Ti mxriv, mas ar SeuZlia mis gareT arsebuli drois mdinarebis SeCereba,
misi ukan motrialeba. cxovrebis gzaze mas xvdebian adamianebi, movlenebi,
siyvaruli. yvelaferi, rac gars akravs, Tanamedrove samyaros pragmatuli
tendenciebis amsaxvelia. ficjeraldi xatovnad asuraTxatebs gmiris da-
Jinebul rbolas axalgazrdobisaken. siberis, rogorc uZlurebis, usaso-
bis, zedmet bargad myofobis autanlobas. magram es plani meorexarisxo-
vania ambisaTvis. mTavaria drois eqsistencionaluri gagebis mniSvnelobis
Cveneba imisa, rom sibere araa dakavSirebuli drois istoriul ganzomile-
basTan. mkiTxvelma unda gaisigrZeganos, rom dro adamianis Sinagan, onto-
logiur mdgomareobas asaxavs da mas sdevs fexdafex. am ambis mTavari idea
imaSia, rom ar arsebobs drois mdinarebis, siberis, axalgazrdobis, siyva-
rulis, urTierTobebis universaluri kanonebi, adamiani Tavad qmnis saku-
Tar samyaros, sakuTari kodeqsiT.
adamianis mokvdaoba da yofierebis maradiuloba
sibere, rogorc dRegrZelobis etapi, yovel kulturaSi gansakuTre-

buli sazrisis matarebelia. igi dakavSirebulia gansxvavebuli diskursis
xedvebTan, mocemuli kulturis intuiciasTan. sxvadasxva kulturaSi sibe-
198
anastasia zaqariaZe _ Anno Domini - siberis fenomeni
ris idea transformirdeba gansxvavebuli siRrmiseuli sazrisiT datvir-

Tul saxeebad da vlindeba gansxvavebuli paradigmis saxiT. sainteresoa
qarTul da inglisur enobriv sivrceSi asaxuli ori xedva. sabasTan asaki gan-
martebulia, rogorc `JamTa sazomi kacTa, rameTu Tvisebasa JamTasa cxad-
hyofs~ (17. 467), xolo miriam vebsteris leqsikonSi àsaki~ (Old) ganimarteba,
rogorc asakSi Sesvla da sibere (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/).
siberes gansxvavebuli metaforebiT amkoben filosofosebi; maga-
liTad, piTagora mas ~sicocxlis zamTars~ uwodebs, ciceroni ~Sesmul
Tass~.
pirvelyofil miTebSi, legendebSi, TqmulebebSi, sagmiro eposSi,
folklorSi mravladaa warmodgenili mxcovan adamianTa saxeebi, rac saSua-
lebas iZleva retrospeqtulad aRvadginoT moxucebulTa socialuri sta-
tusi da moraluri avtoriteti patriarqalur sazogadoebebSi. uxucesis,
rogorc kulturuli, sameurneo, religiuri, moraluri gamocdilebisa da
codnis, patronisa da mcvelis mdgomareoba, ganapirobebda moxucTa gansa-
kuTrebul rols. es tradiciiTac myardeboda.
aRmosavlur, magaliTad, indur tradiciaSi sibere ganixileboda, ro-
gorc cxovrebis gzis damasrulebeli etapi; rodesac adamiani, sibrZnis Zi-
ebis gzaze Semdgari, maswavleblis saxiT ubrundeba sofels; siberemdeli
sicocxlis etapebi xasiaTdeboda Semdegnairad: gafurCqvnis, simwifis, ka-
nonSemoqmedebiTi, gansakuTrebuli aqtivobis, samoqalaqo, SemoqmedebiTi
Zalebis da a.S. Cinur tradiciaSi sibere gansakuTrebuli pativiscemiT iyo
pativdebuli. daoizmis mimdevari mkurnalebis azriT, xangrZlivi cxovreba
adamianSi inisa da ianis sasicocxlo Zalebis harmoniisa da misi maradiuli
erTobasTan wilnayarobis niSania.
antikuri epoqidan moyolebuli, siberis problema gamokveTilad iZens
metafizikur mniSvnelobas; adamiani metafizikuri arsebaa da misi sicocx-
le, asakobrivi periodebi identificirdeba funqciur mzaobasTan, gaxdes
moSuale miwier da zeciur samyaroebs Soris.
antikur cnobierebaSi, kerZod platonTan, asaki da xelisufleba da-
kavSirebulia sibrZnesTan; igi idealuri saxelmwifos safuZvelia. pla-
tonis mixedviT, siberes sruli simSvide da yovelgvari vnebaTaRelvisgan
ganTavisufleba mosdevs (1.5) da iqve: wesieri da TavdaWerili kacisTvis
sibere arc Zneli asatania, uwesos da aRviraxsnils ki siberis gaZlebac
uWirs da siWabukisac (1.5). siberis filosofiuri konceptualizacia, gvi-
an elinizmSi, mocemulia ciceronis specialur traqtatSi siberis Sesa-
xeb. igi gvawvdis sicocxlis daisis filosofiis klasikur magaliTs. gviC-
venebs, rom is adamiani, romelmac aRasrula Tavisi zneobrivi movaleoba
da samyaros moqalaqis wodeba daimsaxura, amayad xvdeba ganvlili wlebis
SinaarsiT datvirTul siberes da povebs mSvid navsayudels. ciceroni aq-
199
cents akeTebs avtoritetis cnebaze. avtoriteti mxolod garegnuli gamo-

xatulebaa im pirovnebis Sinagani Rirsebis da simrTelisa, romelmac mTeli
cxovreba miuZRvna umaRles idealebs. sibere adamianuri sicocxlis dramis
ukanaskneli aqtia, romelSic sicocxliT kmayofilebas sikvdili drou-
lad moyavs (4. 23).
sqolastikaSi mowifulobisa da siberis gageba transformirebuli
da gadaazrebulia. Cndeba askezis cneba. aRorZinebis evropuli humanizmi
svams axal aqcentebs. aSkaraa sakiTxisadmi interesis simwire, rac ganmanaT-
leblobis epoqasac gasdevs. am periodSi gamoirCeva miSel montenis kvleva,
Tumca, mis SemoqmedebaSi yvelaze mokle kvleva/~cda~ eZRvneba siberes da
masTan damokidebulebis sakiTxs (12. 288-300). me-19 saukunis miwuruls evro-
pul kulturaSi dgeba radikaluri cvlilebebis xana, romlis konteqstSi
aqcenti sicocxlis dasawyiszea gadatanili; kvlevevis interesi bavSvobis,
rogorc gansakuTrebuli samyaros, eqsistencionaluri horizontis gax-
snaze koncentrirdeba. socialuri da kulturuli transformaciebis Se-
degad Tanamedrove dasavlur civilizaciaSi sibere `gandevnilia~, igi, ro-
gorc fenomeni, ubralod, gauqmebulia; siberis zizRi, e.w. gerontofobia
Tanamedrove refleqsiaSi, arsebiT maxasiaTeblad gvevlineba, xolo asakTa
Soris saukeTesod da sasurvelad dgindeba axalgazrdoba; axalgazrdoba,
rogorc adamianSi àdamianuris~ sazomi. erTgan Tanamedrove amerikeli mwe-
rali mark tveni Cveuli sarkazmiT aRniSnavs: `ra samwuxaroa, rom sicocx-
lis saukeTeso nawili dasawyiss emTxveva, uaresi dasasruls~ (It was a pity
that the best part of life came at the beginning and the worst part at the end.) .
me-20 saukunis dasawyisidan sibere gamokveTilad bunebismecnierTa
interesis saganad iqceva. sakiTxis mimarT gansakuTrebuli interesi gamoi-
xata siberisa da daberebis sistemur mecnierul da gamoyenebiT kvlevebSi.
safuZveli eyreba axali dargebis Camoyalibebas, romlebic uSualod sibe-
ris fenomens, daberebis faqtorebs da maTi Tavidan acilebis meqanizmebs
ikvlevda. medicinis gansakuTrebuli interesis fokusSi moeqca sicocx-
lis gaxangrZlivebis, organizmis dauZlurebisa da daberebis SeCerebis,
adamianis funqcionaluri aqtivobis SenarCunebis meTodikebis damuSaveba.
iqmneba axali specialoba medikos-gerontologi, romelic konkretulad
am sakiTxebiTaa dakavebuli. usamarTloba iqneboda ar aRgveniSna am mimar-
TulebiT miRweuli mniSvnelovani Sedegebi. amasTan, problemisadmi viwro
bunebismecnieruli da samedicino-`teqnikuri~, iseve rogorc socialur
-mwarmoebluri midgoma migviTiTebs sakiTxisadmi calmxriv, Sesabamisad,
naklovan damokidebulebas. adamiani ar aris mxolod organizmi an resursi
da arc misi siberea mxolod da mxolod fizikur-fsiqikuri, an socialur-
disfunqciuri movlena. siberis problemis gadawyveta ar SeiZleba movaqci-
oT mxolod fizikuri an inteleqtualuri uZlurebis problemis gadawy-
vetis farglebSi. migvaCnia, rom gansakuTrebuli interesis sagnad unda iq-
200
ces siberis, rogorc zneobrivi problemis, analizi konkretuli individis

cxovrebiseul konteqstSi. siberis biologiuri aspeqti, anu, Tu rogor un-
da miaRwios adamianma siberis asakamde da misi socialur-fsiqologiuri as-
peqti, sxva sityviT, Tu rogor unda gadarCes siberis asakSi myofi adamiani,
adekvaturad mxolod mas Semdgom SeiZleba gaixsnas, rodesac siberis meta-
fizikuri da zneobrivi sazrisi gaixsneba risTvisaa saWiro sicocxle? ra
sazrisis matarebelia asaki? rogori zneobrivi Sinaarsis matarebelia asa-
kovani adamiani? aris Tu ara siberis etapi adamianis sicocxlis gzaze misi
cxovrebis srulfasovani etapi?
siberis fenomenis mimarT eTikuri problematikis aqtualizeba upi-
rispirdeba Camoyalibebul stereotipebs rogorc eTikis kvlevis arealis,
misi Sesaswavli sagnis, miznebis da amocanebis, iseve Tavad siberis fenome-
nis mimarTac. es ukanaskneli umal medicinis, biologiisa da sociologiis
analizis sagnadaa dasaxuli. TiTqosda sibere mxolod biomedicinis ciklis
disciplinaTa CarCoSi unda iyos moqceuli; siberis fenomenis mimarT sci-
entisturad orientirebul Tanamedrove eTikaSi filosofiuri kiTxvebis
dayenebac ki moxsnilia. aucilebelia analizis am calmxrivi sqemidan gamos-
vla. siberis fenomenis gaSuqeba ànti-naturalisturi~ poziciidan gaxsna,
saSuri saqmea.
adamianis biologiuri aRnagi da adamianis buneba.

dRegrZelobis sazomi
specialur literaturaSi arsebobs siberis mravali ganmarteba, isi-

ni garkveul korelaciaSi arian siberis rogorc kulturul-tipologiur
gansxvavebebTan, ise masobriv cnobierebaSi arsebul mravalferovan gan-
martebebTan. asakis cnebaSi samedicino-biologiuri, socialuri da eTi-
kur-sulieri gageba gamoiyofa. asakobrivi klasifikaciebi mravalferova-
nia da siberis sazRvrebis dadgenisas isini Wrel suraTs warmoadgenen: 45
wlidan 70 wlamde. mecnierebi svamen sakiTxs siberis qronologiur asaksa
da mis sociologiur maxasiaTeblebs Soris mimarTebis Sesaxeb. es problema
gansakuTrebul aqtualobas iZens Tanamedrove postindustriuli qveyne-
bis cxovrebis wesSi mniSvnelovani cvlilebebis fonze, kerZod, biosamedi-
cino teqnologiebis ganviTarebis, samedicino momsaxurebis donis amaRle-
bis fonze.
moraluri cnobierebis RirebulebiT struqturaSi cnebebis `beberi~,
`sibere~ Sinaarsis gaxsnisas dominirebs maTi sociokulturuli da ara bio-
logiuri komponentebi.
siberis fenomenis mimarT eTikuri TvalsazrisiT arsebiTia aqtivo-
bis iseTi komponentebi, rogoricaa TviTSegneba, refleqsuroba sakuTari
201
Tavisa da uwyvet mdinarebaSi myofi sicocxlis, gonivruli sicocxlis mi-

marT. Tu koreqtuli iqneba terminis `mSvenieri sibere~ gamoyeneba, igi am
momentebisagan Semdgari unda iyos.
Tavad siberis ideaSi dafarulia winaaRmdegobaTa rigi adamianis si-
cocxlis biologiur, socialur, fsiqologiur, sulier Sinaarsebs Soris.
am winaaRmdegobaTa gadawyvetaSi ixsneba pirovnuli zrdis/ganviTarebis xa-
risxi, sicocxlis neba, maradiuli cxovrebisaken swrafva. siberis dayvana
biologiur, socialur, fsiqologiur, anTropologiur da sxv. Semadgenel
elementze mcdaria. yoveli maTgani mxolod sakuTari kuTxidan, nawilob-
rivad, calmxrivad xsnis siberis sazriss.
sistemaSi samyaro-adamiani sibere gulisxmobs adamianuri yofie-
rebis ganxilvas universumis konteqstSi. igi simboluri sazrisiTaa dat-
virTuli, masSi ixsneba ormxrivi, urRvevi sakraluri kavSiri adamiansa da
samyaros Soris. es sazrisi Cans yvela kulturaSi, igi aniWebs mniSvnelobas
siberes, rogorc cxovrebis gzis garkveul etaps erTeuli pirovnebis do-
neze.
siberis eqsistencionaluri sazrisi vlindeba imaSi, rom igi xorcs
asxams Sinagan kavSirs, apirobebs Sinagan Tanaziarobas ara oden cocxal da
gardacvlil TaobaTa Soris, aramed, upirveles yovlisa, cocxal TaobaTa
Soris; igi xsnis adamianis sicocxlis gzis sibrZnes, rogorc kacobriobis
istoriis uwyvtobis safuZvels. sibere, erTi mxriv, aris pirovnebis sulie-
ri Camoyalibebis etapi da, meore mxriv, `yofierebis gansakuTrebuli saxiT
TviTgaxsnis momenti, risganac da rasTan erTadac yofierebas sxva saxeebi
TanafardobaSi moyavs~ (10. 115).
sibere, rogorc adamianis Sinagani momwifebis mdgomareoba, umaRle-
si Rirebulebis mqonea sxva asakebTan mimarTebaSi. sibere metafizikuria im
planSi, rom esaa mzadeba imanenturi yofierebidan transcendenturSi gas-
vlisa. sibere, antikuri periodis moazrovneTa gagebiT, dakavSirebulia
adamianis organizmis, misi sxeulis cvlilebebTan, am planSi igi axlosaa
siberis Tanamedrove xedvasTan. Tumca, antikurobisagan gansxvavebiT, Tana-
medroveobaSi siberis fenomeni zogadad, misi metafizika da esTetika uar-
yofiTadaa Sefasebuli. asakTa TeoriaSi platoni misdevs aRmosavlur re-
ligiur tradicias kosmosuri ciklebis Sesaxeb. igi wers samyaros SesaZlo
ormag moZraobaze, romelic iwvevs kosmosur katastrofebs da Jamianobas
dedamiwaze, rasac mohyveba ganaxleba kosmosuri aRorZineba. adamianebi
iwyeben gaaxalgazrdavebas, moxucTa Tmebi iwyebs gaSavebas da a.S. mowifu-
li adamianebi sul ufro da ufro pataravdebian simaRleSi, axalSobilTa
zomamde, dabolos, ilevian (1.176). samyaros ormag moZraobas SeuZlia gamo-
iwvios rogorc paradoqsuli ukan ganviTareba adamianisa, rogorc mikro-
kosmosisa, ise micvalebulTa aRdgomac. amitomac adamianis asaki pirobi-
202
Tia. berZnul filosofiaSi adamianuri sicocxlis asakebis, e.w. Svidi se-

zonis Taviseburebebis, Seswavlas gansakuTrebuli yuradReba eqceva in-
dividualuri cxovrebis, misi fsiqologiuri da socialuri organizaciis
CamoyalibebaSi. daberebis mizezebis Zieba ori mimarTulebiT mimdinareobs.
kosmologiur mizezebs ezoTeruli interpretaciis gziT xsnian. magali-
Tad, platoni uTiTebs, rom cocxali arseba tvinze mTavari samkuTxedebis
moqmedebis mosustebis gamo berdeba da suli sixaruliT Sordeba mas. sam-
kuTxedi, anu cifri, sami mistikuri sistemis centraluri wertilia, RvTa-
ebrivis, bunebrivis da adamianuri sawyisebis erTobis simboloa. samyaro-
uli samoba Tavs iyris RvTaebis erTianobaSi, adamianis TviTcnobierebaSi
da nebaSi, romlebSic sxeulis, sulisa da safSvinvelis yvela Tviseba erT
cocxal arsebaSi iyris Tavs. sibereSi adamianis TviTcnobiereba, misi Tvi-
Toba acnobierebs survils SeuerTdes pirvelwyaros, Tavis meore TviTo-
bas. kosmologiur mimarTulebas miekuTvneba Tvalsazrisi, romlis mixed-
viT sibere ganixileba, rogorc substanciur elementebs: wyals, haers, miwa-
sa da cecxls Soris simetriis darRveva. daberebis energetikuli mizezebi
parmenidesTan dakavSirebulia siTbos naklebobasTan, romelic SeiZleba
moazrebuli iyos, rogorc aranivTieri elementis RvTaebrivi cecxlis
gageba. adamianis sxeuli arasrulyofilia, mas TviTkmari mniSvneloba aqvs.
progresirebadi daberebis dros saWiroa misi tonusSi moyvana da am mdgo-
mareobis SenarCuneba. dauSvebelia zedmetobani, saWiroa higienis dacva,
radganac sxeuli ukvdavi sulis matarebeli taZaria. piTagorasa da plato-
nis azriT, mis movlas gansakuTrebuli yuradReba unda mieqces, winaaRmdeg
SemTxvevaSi suli dabinZurdeba, suli sxeulis eTeruli oreulia. sainte-
resoa platonis mosazreba, romelsac igi kanonebSi gadmoscems da exeba
zneoriv aRzrdaSi musikis rols. idealur saxelmwifoSi xalxi CarTuli
unad iyos cekva-TamaSSi. platonis sami asakobrivi ferxulis koncefciaSi
mesame 30-60 wlamde asakobrivi jgufi moqalaqeebisa dionises eZRvneba,
xolo isini, vinc 60-saa gadacilebuli, organizmis uZlurebis gamo ar arian
CarTuli saerTo ferxulSi. aristotele, gansxvavebiT platonisgan, mou-
wodebs moxucebs imgvar simRerebs mimarTon, rasac maT buneba ukarnaxebs.
saerTod, berZnebTan ar dgas garegnuli efeqtis problema, anu unari da
miswrafeba gamoiyurebode axalgazrdad. asaki ganisazRvreba socialuri
gradaciiT, im jgufis mier, romelsac is ganekuTvneba, bavSvobis asakidan
dawyebuli, vidre siberemde, xolo zneobrivi problema: iyo, Tu Tavi moaC-
veno, erTmniSvnelovnad wydeba iyo is, rac xar. `Tu daberdi, Tavs biWad nu
aCveneb ambobdnen kinikosebi (2.128).
sxva sakiTxia, rom gansakuTrebuli datvirTva eniWeba sxeulis mov-
las. adamians evaleba misi mofrTxileba, xelis Sewyoba, rom igi janmrTel
mdgomareobaSi iyos. sxeuli axalgazrdaa, vidre igi harmoniulia, moqnili
203
da proporciulia. magaliTad, igive antikurobaSi aTenis moqalaqes evale-

boda mTeli cxovreba gimnastikiT yofiliyo dakavebuli, medikosTa rCevebs
miyoloda. medicina miiCneoda yvelaze brZnul mecnierebad, igi sxeulsa da
sulsa da kosmoss Soris moSualed miiCneoda. meore mimarTuleba naturfi-
losofiis farglebSi ganixilavs siberes. berZnebTan kvlevis erTi yvela-
ze popularuli meTodi analogiaa; Cveulebriv xdeba aracocxali bunebis
sagnebis analogiiT Sedareba cocxali bunebis sagnebTan, xolo sxeuli ga-
nixileba gaxsnili sistemis principiT. sxeuls ar aqvs dasawyisi, misi yvela
wertili Tanabrad sawyisicaa da dasasrulic: moxazeT wre ver ipoviT da-
sawyiss. (6.206) adamianis sxeuli kosmiur sxeulSia CarTuli da atarebs mis
anarekls. Sesabamisad, ar SeiZleba arsebobdes daberebis pirveladi, amamu-
Savebeli mizezi amgvarad, logosis gamomJRavneba xdeba fenomenalur sam-
yaroSi.
organizmis stimulaciis Tanamedrove biosamedicino meTodebi:

gaaxalgazrdaveba, sicocxlis gaxangrZliveba,
adamianis biofizikuri ukvdaveba pro da contra
sxvadasxva kerZo disciplinaTa kvlevebi aCveneben rom, xandazmul

adamianebs daweuli aqvT TviTSefaseba, uZlierdebaT imis SegrZneba, rom
maTi yofiereba fuWia, usargeblo, gaufasurebulia sakuTari Tavisa da si-
cocxlis RirebulebiTi Sefaseba. mZlavrobs sxvadasxva saxis SiSebi mar-
to darCenis, usasobis, gaRatakebis, sikvdilis; iklebs gare samyarosadmi
interesi, novaciebis aRqmisa da miRebis unari, izrdeba interesi warsulis
movlenebis Sefasebis mimarT. am tipis cvlilebebi xandazmuli adamianis
damaxasiaTebel saxes qmnian.
amasTan, aRsaniSnavia, rom Tanamedrove msoflios damaxasiaTebeli
demografiuli niSania xandazmul adamianTa ricxvis zrda. gaeros monace-
mebiT, 1950 wels msoflioSi iyo 214 mil. 60 wlis da zemoT asakis adamiani,
1975 wlisaTvis maTi ricxvi gaizarda 350 mil-mde. gaeros demografiuli
departamentis prognoziT, 2025 wlisaTvis 60 wlisa da zemoT asakis mqone
mosaxleobis raodenoba 5-jer gaizrdeba da 1 miliard 100 milions miaR-
wevs. paradoqsuli faqtis mowmeni vxdebiT ocdameerTe saukunis pirvel
aTwleulSi. erTi mxriv, gaizarda xandazmul adamianTa ricxvi, romelTac
mwvaved esaWiroebaT samedicino daxmareba da paralelurad imata genuri
inJineriisa da biosamedicino institutebis ricxvma, romlebic intensiu-
rad muSaoben gaaxalgazrdavebis proeqtebze. iqmneba fetalur qsovilTa
bankebi. aRsaniSnavia, rom sabWoTa medicina jer kidev 20-ian wlebSi miznad
isaxavda amoexsna maradiuli axalgazrdobis problema, am mxriv garkveuli
Sedegebic hqondaT, afTiaqebSi iyideboda qimiurad damuSavebuli embrio-
204
nuli masala, rogorc gansakuTrebulad aqtiuri biologiuri Tvisebebis

matarebeli qsovilebi, maT miewerebodaT organizmis metabolizmis cik-
lis, vitaluri meqanizmis gaaqtiureba.
dRes dasavlel biologTa da medikosTa nawili moiTxovs Seiqmnas
`klonirebis saxelmwifo programa~, romelic realurad SeZlebs sul axlo
momavalSi sicocxlis gaxangrZlivebas 500 wlamde. cnobilia, rom qveynis,
saxelmwifos keTildReoba fasdeba imiT, Tu rogoria mosaxleobis sicocx-
lis xangrZlivoba. eklesia Tavis locvebSi mravalJamierebas iTxovs mrev-
lisTvis, yoveli liturgia sruldeba mravali wlis umtkivneulo, janmrTe-
li sicocxlis TxovniT.
xom ar niSnavs es imas, rom qristianul anTropologiaSi gamarTlebu-
lia sicocxlis nebismieri xerxiT gaxangrZliveba, rom igi dadebiTad afa-
sebs Tanamedrove biosamedicino teqnologiebis mcdelobebs, nebismieri
xerxiT moaxerxon daberebis procesis SeCereba, ufro metic, ukan mobru-
neba; rom es aucilebeli da, ufro metic, gamarTlebuli saqmianobaa? sad
unda veZeboT kriteriumi marTebuli poziciisa, humanizmis abstraqtul
msjelobebSi, Tu uaxlesi biosamedicino teqnologiebis xlarTebSi? vfiq-
robT, rom pasuxi siberis fenomenis mimarT konkretul damokidebulebaSi
unda gaixsnas.
siberis fenomeni qristianobaSi
evropul kulturaSi siberisadmi Tvisebrivad axleburi damokidebu-

leba qristianobam Semoitana. es mxcovani adamianisadmi gansakuTrebulad
aRmatebuli RirebulebiTi statusis damkvidrebaSi gamoixata.
mravalTa JamisaTa sibrZne povian da mravalsa Sina cxovrebasa mec-
nierebai (iob.12,12). moZaladea xalxi, romelic moxucs pativs ar scems...
(msaj.28.50). Zveli aRqmiseuli tradicia axal aRqmaSi da qristianul RvTis-
metyvelebaSi povebs gagrZelebasa da Semdgom damuSavebas. Rrma sazrisis
matarebelia wm. grigol nazianzelis gamonaTqvamSi, rom sibere siZlierea.
sibere, rogorc sisuste, Zalebis dacema, degradacia qristianul eTi-
kaSi, Sebrunebulia dadebiTi kuTxiT. sibere, rogorc samani da sicocxlis
gvirgvini, sulieri orientiris mniSvnelobiT ivseba, igi maradiulobis
realurad arsebobis ubadlo dasturia. qristianul diskursSi sibere aR-
niSnavs adamianSi metafizikuri mniSvnelobiT savse mdgomareobas. aq mox-
snilia aristoteleseuli akmes asakis prioritetulobis socialuri er-
TmniSvnelovneba.
axali aRqmis kulturaSi gansakuTrebuli pativiscema ikiTxeba xan-
dazmulTa mimarT, amis naTeli magaliTia ikonografia. odigitriis xatze
yrma iesos saxe gamoxatulia siberis aSkarad gamoxatuli niSnebiT, yrmis
205
maRali Subli naoWebiTaa daserili, sxva xatebzec vxvdebiT igive Sinaarsis

matarebel saxes. es tendencia gansakuTrebiT holandiuri xatweris nimu-
Sebze SeimCneva. siberis dadebiTi socialur-eTikuri Sefaseba ikiTxeba e.w.
`starcobis~ (rus.: ) fenomenSi sibere-beri-beroba. es araa sasu-
liero ganzomilebis ierarqiuli safexuri esaa sulieri cxovrebis umaR-
lesi forma, qristianis Sinagani gmiroba, stareci SeiZleba iyos ubralo
beri, episkoposi, monazonic ki. beroba si-beris martivi warmodgenis far-
glebs gareT gadis. eklesiis mier starcebis mimarT gansakuTrebuli pati-
viscemis gamoxatva SeiZleba miviCnioT Tanamedrove socialur kulturaSi
socialuri rolisa da zneobrivi Rirebulebis damcrobis winaaRmdeg mi-
marTul aqtad.
qristianuli anTropologiis zneobrivi normebi aregulirebs Taoba-
Ta Soris konfliqtebsac. emyareba ra dekalogis mexuTe mcnebas pativi
eci mamasa da dedasa Sensa, raTa dRegrZel iyo miwaze, romelic ufals, Sens
RmerTs moucia SenTvis (gam. 20.12), xandazmuli, moxuci adamianis movla
madlis moxveWis gzadaa dasaxuli: . . .raoden uyavT erTsa amas mcireTagan-
sa ZmaTa CemTasa, igi me miyavT (maTe 25.40).
sxvaTa Soris, dekalogSi mexuTe mcneba erTaderTia, romelSic mizez-
Sedegobrivi damokidebulebaa asaxuli. adamianis sicocxlis xangrZlivoba
adamianis zneobriv unarebzea damokidebuli da ara gansakuTrebuli sakve-
bi reJimis, kompleqsuri fizkulturuli varjiSebis, gakaJebis, an sxva fiq-
sirebul biofiziologiur faqtorebze. marTalni ufroisad ganmravldes
siberesa sipoxisasa da fufuneul iyvnen (fsal. 91,14). es msjelobebi uSu-
alo kavSirSia adamianis bunebasTan, romelic mokvdavobisa da ukvdavebis
sazRvrebSi arsebobda.
ufals adamiani mokvdavi rom gaeCina, dacemis Semdeg ar miusjida mok-
vdavobas, radganac SeuZlebelia sikvdiliT dasajo mokvdavi, ukvdavi rom
Seeqmna, adamians ar dasWirdeboda kveba, ramdenadac ukvdavs ar sWirdeba
sxeulebrivi kveba. adamiani Seiqmna rogorc ukvdavi in potentia (3. 26-27).
adamianis bunebis es sazRvriToba masSi gansakuTrebul siRrmeebs xsnis, ux-
mobs sulieri unarebis ganviTarebisaken, maradiuli yofierebis horizon-
tis gaxsnisken. `me varsebob. ras niSnavs es? Cemi erTi nawili ukve iyo, sxva,
meore exla var, sxvac viqnebi, Tu viqnebi. me ara var raRac aucilebeli
ram, uwyvetad mdinare mRvrie mdinaris nakadi var, romelic erT wamsac ar
Cerdeba, ras uwodebT me-s aqedan? ra Seadgens me-s, Tqveni azriT? (5.42).
p. florenski werda, rom is, rac Cveulebriv sxeulad iwodeba, sxva ara-
feria, Tu ara ontologiuri zedapiris iqiT, am garsis iqiT mxares arsebuli
Cveni arsebobis mistikuri siRrme. yvelaferi is, rasac garegnul bunebas
vuwodebT Cveni `sxeulis~ CaTvliT, mxolod yofierebis ori siRrmis me-
sa da ara-me-s zedapirebis sazRvaria (6.205).
206
qristianobaSi naTladaa moniSnuli mravalwlianobis zneobrivi faq-

torebi. mexuTe mcneba dekalogisa ase JRers: pativ-ec mamasa Sensa da dedasa
Sensa, raiTa keTil geyos Sen da dRegrZel iyvne queyanasa zeda. yoveli li-
turgia mravalJamieri sicocxlis TxovniT sruldeba. amavdroulad, qris-
tianul anTropologiaSi dafiqsirebulia sicocxlis konkretuli droiTi
sazRvari. Zvel aRqmaSi esaa 120 weli, aseve gvxvdeba termini `keTili sibe-
re, romelic Zveli aRqmiseuli tradiciiT niSnavs umtkivneulo, janmrTel
siberes, anu qristianuli anTropologiis am velze erTmniSvnelovani kav-
Siri siberesa da avadmyofobas Soris ar arsebobs. aseve ar aris damaxasia-
Tebeli siberis erTmniSvnelovani dayvana asakze, adamianis mier ganvlil
wlebze. magaliTad, meufeTa meore wignSi 80 wlis adamianze naTqvamia, rom
igi Zalian beberia. sibere ara oden fiziologiuri, aramed sulier-zneob-
rivi mdgomareobis aRmniSvnelia, radgan sapatio sibere arc dRegrZelo-
baSia da arc welTa ricxviT ganizomeba. sibrZne WaRaraa adamianisaTvis da
ubiwo cxovreba siberis asakia (sibrZ.4,8-9). siberis gza sibrZnis gzaa da ar
izomeba wlebiT. solomoni gvaswavlis `mTavari sibrZne sibrZnis moxveWaa,
yovel mosaxveWelTagan codna moixveWeo(igav. 4.7).
ismine Svilo da Seiwynaren sityuani Cemni, da ganmravldes welni cxov-
rebisa Senisani, raiTa iyvnen Senda mraval gza cxovrebisa (4.10).
es orientireba konstruqciulia gerontologiisaTvis, sadac obieq-
turi (kalendaruli) da subieqturi asakis acdena seriozul eTikur da fsi-
qologiur problemebs qmnis. subieqturi asaki bevr faqtorzea damokide-
buli. pirovneba adamianis dinamiuri da cvladi bunebis uryevi sawyisia,
romelic `masSi da misiT arsebobs~ (6.205).
qristianuli TvalsazrisiT, adamianis ganviTarebisa da socializaci-
is arc erT asakobriv fazas aranairi privilegia ar gaaCnia. magaliTad, `ko-
laeli yrmani~ mowameobis gvirgviniT wmindanTa dasSi Caewernen. isini ufro
maRla idgnen, vidre maTi warmarTi mSoblebi, romlebic asakiT maTze ufro-
sebi iyvnen. RvTismetyvelebi miuTiTeben, rom mkvdreTiT aRdgomis Semdeg
aRar iqneba fizikuri asaki. paisi mTawmindelTan vkiTxulobT: `yvela erTi
asakis iqneba, ymawvilebi, moxucebi, bavSvebi, imitom, rom yvela adamians
erTnairi suli aqvs. anu imqveyniur cxovrebaSi yvelas erTi angelozuri
asaki eqneba~ (11.43).
maSasadame, qristianobaSi siberis pozitiur sazrisze aqcentireba
araviTar SemTxvevaSi ar unda agverios gerontokratiis raime formaSi. ma-
galiTad, pirvelyofil TemebSi asakobrivad uxucess avtomaturad eniWe-
boda socialurad domonanti statusi. es tendencia SeiZleba industriuli
sazogadoebis garkveul formebSic moqmedebdes. magaliTad, sabWoTa sis-
tema e.w. uZraobis fazaSi, bevri analitikosis mier, Sefasebulia, rogorc
gerontokratia. SesaZlo asakobrivi frustraciebis Tavidan acileba SesaZ-
207
lebelia siberis zneobrivi Rirebulebis sazrisis gacnobierebisa da win wa-

mowevis SemTxvevaSi.
sikvdili qristianuli eTikis perspeqtivaSi
statiis formati saSualebas ar gvaZlevs farTod gavaanalizoT sik-

vdilis problema. meore mxriv, naTelia, rom siberis fenomeni srulyofi-
lad ver aixsneba, Tuki am sakiTxs gverds avuvliT.
sicocxlisa da sikvdilis urTierTmimarTebis sakiTxi uZvelesia. ad-
re Tu gvian adamiani acnobierebs, rom amqveynad yvelaferi bolovadia, rom
odesme yvelaferi dasruldeba. fsiqologiurad sicocxle da sikvdili er-
TmaneTSi gadadian. `dabadeba niSnavs gardacvalebas~, ambobdnen antikosi
filosofosebi. stoikosebi gvaswavlidnen, rom sikvdili sicocxleSi yve-
laze mniSvnelovani movlenaa; Tu kargad cxovrebas iswavli, e.i. kargad sik-
vdili giswavliao. cnobilia cicerones sityvebi `filosofiis Seswavlis
sazrisi sikvdilisaTvis mzadebaSia~. misi Tanamedrove seneka fiqrobs, rom
àdamiani sinamdvileSi mxolod sikvdilis pirispir ibadeba~. kacobriobis
azrovnebis istoriis ganviTarebis mTel manZilze, sikvdilze praqtikulad
yvela didi moazrovne fiqrobda da werda. amerikeli filosofosi da fsi-
qoTerapevti irvin ialomi gamokvlevaSi èqsistencionaluri fsiqoTera-
pia~ wers, rom, rodesac 1926 wels martin haidegeri swavlobda sakiTxs, Tu
ratom icavs sikvdilis ideas adamiani, mas gaexsna Sinagani xedva (insight), rom
sakuTari mosalodneli sikvdilis gacnobiereba gvaiZulebs arsebobis uf-
ro maRal modusze gadavideT. haidegers miaCnda, rom samyaroSi ori fun-
damenturi modusi arsebobs: 1) yofierebis daviwyebis mdgomareoba, 2) yo-
fierebis gacnobierebis mdgomareoba (18. 56). adamianebi ZiriTadad pirvel,
àraauTentur~ (haidegeris terminologia) modusSi imyofebian, anu saganTa
samyaros rutinaSi myofoben. aq adamiani ar aris sakuTari cxovrebis Semoq-
medi, igi `gaqceviT icavs Tavs~, `xafangSi eqceva~. meore modusSi cxovreba
niSnavs, rom adamians mudmivad gacnobierebuli aqvs sakuTari yofiereba,
anu atarebs mis mimarT pasuxismgeblobas. haidegers esmis, rom meore mo-
dusSi gadasasvlelad saWiroa eqstremaluri cda, romelic moaxdens ada-
mianis àmoferTxvas~, àmoglejas~ arsebobis yoveldRiuri modusidan yo-
fierebis gacnobierebis mdgomareobaSi (karl iaspersi imaves gulisxmobda,
rodesac `sazRvriT~ mdgomareobebze laparakobda). sikvdili am saxis cda-
Ta Soris gamorCeulia sikvdili adamians aZlevs saSualebas icxovros au-
Tenturad .
sikvdilis SiSi imdenad Zlieria, rom adamiani udides sasicocxlo
energias xarjavs mis gauqmebaze, misgan gaqcevis mcdelobebze. mTeli ka-
cobriobis istoriis manZilze adamiani cdilobs sxvadasxva gziT moipovos
208
ukvdaveba: qmnis STamomavlobas, xelovnebis nimuSebs, eweva aRmSeneblobas,

SemoqmedebiTad moRvaweobs.
Tanamedrove filosofia `sikvdilis mimarT gangaSis~ cnebas utria-
lebs. iaspersi mas `yofierebis warmavalobas~ uwodebs, kirkegori `Zrwo-
las ar-yofnis mimarT~, `haidegeri~ `SesaZleblobis Semdgom SeuZleblo-
bas~, tilixi òntologiur gangaSs/Zrwolas~.
ialomi ganasxvavebs sikvdilis gangaSis sam tips: SiSi imis mimarT, rac
sikvdilis Semdeg gvelis; Tavad `movlenis~ kvdoma SiSi; yofierebis Sewy-
vetis SiSi (18.276).
SiSi da Zrwola pirvelad ganasxvava kirkegorma. sagnobriv SiSs, raRa-
cis mimarT SiSs man daupirispira arafris mimarT SiSi: rogorc Tavad aR-
niSnavda: àraferi, rasTanac adamians araferi saerTo ara aqvs~. SiSi, ro-
melsac SeuZlebelia gaugo, moniSno misi lokalizeba, ufro saSiSi xdeba;
mas win ver aRudgebi. masTan SebrZoleba SesaZlebelia mxolod im SemTxve-
vaSi, Tu arafridan vaqcevT raRacad (18.279-80). swored amas gulisxmob-
da kirkegori. filosofosi dgas qristianisa da evropeli kulturis adami-
anis poziciaze. sikvdili misTvis gansakuTrebuli fenomenia. kirkegoris
mixedviT sikvdilis gacnobiereba sasowarkveTas badebs (~sikvdilis avad-
myofobas~ uwodebs kirkegori). termini `sasowarkveTa~ kirkegorTan axal
konotaciebs iZens. avadmyofobis metaforis analogiiT martivad SeiZleba
warmovidginoT sasowarkveTis buneba avadmyofobis mwvave formis Caqro-
ba SeiZleba, magram misi Ziri sxeulSi rCeba axali recidivis warmoSobamde.
sasowarkveTisgan gankurneba SesaZlebelia mxolod saswauliT (faqtobri-
vad, absurdis rwmeniT). avadmyofoba imgvari bunebisaa, rom kvlav warmoCe-
nis dros mTlianad gadaxazavs sulieri janmrTelobis periods. sikvdilis
avadmyofoba emociebis meoxebiTac moqmedebs da inteleqtiTac, anu adami-
anis refleqsiis yvela safexurze. am mimarTebiT yvela adamiani daavadebu-
lia, sasowarkveTa Cveni arsebobis umniSvnelovanesi maxasiaTebelia. kirke-
gori amtkicebs, rom sikvdilis avadmyofobas ar mivyavarT realur sikvdi-
lamde. sikvdili fizikurad gadis frCxilebs gareT, sikvdilis Semdgomi
arseboba ganisazRvreba sulis amwuTieri mdgomareobiT. sasowarkveTile-
bas amarcxebs rwmenaSi misuli `me~. abraamis figura kirkegoris mixedviT
aris individis magaliTi, romelmac sasowarkveTileba daamarcxa. rwmenis
Seudarebel rainds uwodebs mas filosofosi. amgvari sulieri mdgomareo-
bis mflobels aRar eSinia sikvdilisa.
postmodernisti filosofosi Jan bodriari sikvdils imdenad mniS-
vnelovan fenomenad Tvlis, rom mis detalur analizs uZRvnis kvlevas
`simboluri gacvla-gamocvla da sikvdili~ (Lechange symbolique et la mort.
Gallimard.1976).
postmodernizmis erT-erTi fuZemdebeli, frangi filosofosi Jan
bodriari dasavluri civilizaciis uaxles mdgomareobas axasiaTebs, ro-
209
gorc xelovnuri, aranamdvili saxeebisa da meqanizmebis, namdvili socia-

luri yofierebis Canacvlebas simulakrebiT. Tanamedrove epoqas bodri-
ari uwodebs hiperrealobis eras. hiperrealoba bodriaris mier Semotani-
li terminia da misi ganmartebiT marqsis cnebis `zednaSenis~ Tanamedrove,
ufro moqnili versiaa. hiperrealobis safuZveli simulaciaa. hiperrealo-
bis erTeulebi simulakrebia niSnebi, anu fenomenebi, romlebic ar arian
sakuTar TavTan igiveobrivni. isini gvagzavnian sxvasTan, ris gamoc maT si-
mulaciurebi ewodebaT. arsebobs simulakrebis sami rigi: kopioebi, funqci-
onaluri analogebi da sakuTriv simulakrebi. yvela Tanamedrove fenome-
ni am ukanasknels miekuTvneba da simboluri gacvla-gamocvlis principiT
funqcionirebs. bodriaris mixedviT, zednaSeni ganapirobebs baziss, Sroma
ar awarmoebs, igi qmnis socializacias. Tanamedrove epoqas axasiaTebs re-
alobis dakargvis grZnoba. realobis ukanaskneli bastioni, bodriaris mi-
xedviT, aris sikvdili. sikvdili, marTlac, erTaderTia, rasac ar aqvs sa-
momxmareblo Rirebuleba(15.298). sikvdilzea dafuZnebuli yovelnairi Za-
laufleba da ekonomika. magram am konteqstSi sikvdili gvevlineba rogorc
fanatizmi (warmodgena). filosofiis ganazrebis sagani saukuneebis manZil-
ze yofiereba iyo, am bolo xans aryofna iqca interesis sagnad, magram dRes
filosofiis winaSe axali sagani simulaturi fsevdoyofierebaa.
bodriari Tvlis, rom Tanamedrove momxmarebluri sazogadoeba un-
da Canacvldes kulturuli alternativiT. esaa gza, romelsac simboluri
gacvla-gamocvlis meqanizmebis mqone arqauli tradiciebisken mivyavarT.
bodriari gulisxmobs rituals, msxverplSewirvas, ZRvenTa gacvlas, Ta-
maSs, poezias. bodriari ganixilavs da upirispirebs erTmaneTs sikvdilis
or saxes: `swrafsa~ da `nels~, anu `gadavadebul sikvdils~, rodesac cocx-
ali adamiani sicocxleSive iqceva simulakrad `gadmonaSTad~. swrafi, Za-
ladobrivi sikvdili, socialuri sistemis mier dadgenili `wesebis gareSe
sikvdili~ icvleba msxverplSewirviT, amgvarad damdgari sikvdili angrevs
mTlianad sistemas da mis temporalurobas. bodriari sasikvdilo-katas-
troful atemporalobas aRmoaCens rogorc eqstremalur movlenebSi, ro-
goricaa revoluciebi da terori: `Cven vocnebobT Zaladobrivi sikvdiliT
aRsrulebaze, radganac neli sikvdiliT vcxovrobT. ukve es ocnebac ki au-
tanelia ZalauflebisaTvis~ (15.106-107), aseve poeziaSi. simboluri gacvla-
gamocvla, erTi mxriv, angrevs `RirebulebaTa cikls~ (15.339), meore mxriv,
misi wyalobiT xorcieldeba `drois cikluri moqceva~ (15.42), Tavad ki
`gacvla-gamocvlis, ZRvenis mirTmevis, Cuqebis cikls warmoadgens~ (15.247).
bodriari mas uwodebs dResaswauls. èsaa ciklis aRdgenis dResaswauli. im
dros, rodesac deficiti Sobs grZlivobis xazobriv ekonomikas: sicocxli-
sa da sikvdilis cikluri revoluciis aRdgenis dResaswaulia~ (15.276).
cnobilia, rom cikluri dro sxvadasxva sazrisis matarebeli SeiZleba
iyos. miTosur `maradiul dabrunebaSi~ igi asaxavs movlenaTa msvlelobis
210
kanonzomierebas, romelic aerTianebs kalendarul dResaswaulebSi asa-

xul bunebis ciklurobas da adamianis sicocxlis ciklurobas. pozitivis-
turi ganmartebiT, igi ganpirobebulia brma statistikuri varaudebiT. Ta-
namedrove civilizaciaSi igi daprogramebulia informaciuli sistemebis
struqturebSi, romlebic muSaoben sqemiT `kiTxva-pasuxi~. sadResaswaulo
cikluroba uaryofs burJuaziuli damgroveblobis xazobriobas. Tanamed-
rove sazogadoebaSi ciklurobis wamyvan models warmoadgens, bodriaris
mixedviT, modis cikluroba (15.171).
avtori xSirad usvams xazs dasavluri civilizaciis maxasiaTebels
warmosaxviT anomalias, sadac yvelaferi ise ar aris `rogorc adamianebs
SeeferebaT~: àrcerTi sxva kultura ar icnobs sikvdilisa da sicocxlis
amgvar opoziciur dapirispirebulobas~ (15. 262), `biologiuri sikvdilis
Seuqcevloba... Cveni kulturisTvisaa specifikuri~(15.282), nebismier sxva
kulturaSi es warmoudgenelia~ (15.316).
qristianul anTropologiaSi adamianis sikvdili Rrma metafizikuri
sazrisiTaa datvirTuli. sikvdili maradiuli cxovrebis gagebasTanaa ga-
nuyoflad dakavSirebuli. am velze adamianis fizikuri sikvdili erTeuli
bunebrivi movlena araa, igi cxadyofs adamianisa da uzenaesis darRveuli
erTobis arsebobas, adamianis martosulobas, mis gaucxoebas `sakuTari yo-
fierebis wyarosa da miznisagan~ (8. 255). ilinis moxdenili terminologiiT
sikvdilSi dabadebis saidumloa gaxsnili (9.286.).
qristianul eTikaSi sikvdili sicocxlis gvirgvinad unda iqces, iseT
finalad, romelSic akiafdeba axali aRmasvlis dasawyisi. igi miwieri gan-
wmendis ukanaskneli nabiji unda gaxdes, ukanaskneli amqveyniuri sulieri
gansacdeli, uflisken mimarTuli sulieri Semecnebis, siyvarulis uka-
naskneli amqveyniuri gamovlena. amitomac axali teqnologiebi, romelic
mimarTulia maradiul amqveyniur sicocxleze, miwieri sicocxlis gaxan-
grZlivebaze, qristianuli cnobierebisaTvis warmoadgens Teoriulad Se-
uTavsebeli ideebis simbiozs. sxeulis mudmiv gaaxalgazrdavebaze, mis uk-
vdavebaze mimarTuli teqnologiebi, mTlianadamianuri arsi mis sxeulze
dayavT.
kvdoma da sikvdili qristianul kulturaSi araa sicocxlis forma-
luri dasruleba, esaa sicocxlis gansakuTrebulad mniSvnelovani stadia.
sikvdilis metafizikuri sazrisi xsnis TiToeuli adamianis valdebulebas
momakvdavi adamianis mimarT da gansazRvravs momvlelis, axloblis gan-
sakuTrebul mniSvnelobasa da pasuxismgeblobas. Tanamedrove dasavlur
kulturaSi gavrcelda termini `socialuri paraziti~ da am terminiT aRi-
niSneba xandazmuli, romelic socialurad sasargeblo saqmianobas veRar
axorcielebs, mis mimarT rekomendebulia samedicino koreqciis Catareba.
xandazmulTa mimarT arakoreqtul, sastik, umowyalo, ulmobel da-
mokidebulebaze apelirebs msoflio samedicino asociaciis mier miRebuli
211
deklaracia xandazmul da moxucebulTa mimarT sastiki damokidebulebis

Sesaxeb (honkongi 1989). sisastike sxvadasxva formiT vlindeba: fizikuri,
fsiqologiuri, materialuri; damcirebas emateba samedicino daxmarebaze
uaris Tqma, arakvalificiuri da arasrulyofili daxmarebis gaweva; gaCnda
termini àraperspeqtiuli pacienti~ da am kategorias miekuTvna qronikuli
daavadebiT daavadebuli da Seuqcevadi fizikuri da fsiqologiuri paTo-
logiebis mqone moxucebi. qristianul diskursSi adamianis da adamianuri
yofierebis gasaRebi unda veZioT adamianis sxva adamianTan urTierTobaSi,
sadac moyvasis siyvaruli imperativis rangSia ayvanili. qristianuli siyva-
ruli Tavis idealSi mtris siyvarulsac gulisxmobs ùkueTu giyuarden
moyuasni xolo Tquenni, rai sasyideli gaqus? rameTu mezuereTaca egreTve
yvian. da ukueTu moikiTxvideT megobarTa xolo TquenTa, rasa umetes iq-
mT?..(maTe 5.46-47) martoobis problema. mitovebuli, sibereSi miusafari
adamianebis ricxvi katastrofulad matulobs, gansakuTrebiT soflad.
daskvnis saxiT:
siberis fenomeni filosofiis yuradRebas antikuri epoqidan imsaxu-

rebda. es bunebrivicaa: siberis gaazreba ganuyreladaa dakavSirebuli yo-
fierebisa da aryofnis, sicocxlisa da sikvdilis, adamianis bunebisa da ar-
sis, sicocxlis sazrisis da sxv. fundamentur TemebTan.
siberis filosofiur refleqsias sxvadasxva kuTxiT exebian: platoni
da aristotele, seneka, m. monteni, f. bekoni, i. kanti, a.Sopenhaueri, f. nic-
Se, s. kirkegori, a. kamiu, k. iaspersi, m. haidegeri, J.p.sartri, ortega-i-gase-
ti da sxvani.
siberis filosofiuri diskursis mniSvneloba imaSia, rom, erTi mxriv,
is cdilobs gascdes konkretuli mecnierebebis mier siberis Taobaze age-
buli pozitiuri codnis Senobas, sadac sibere sakuTar TviTkmarobaSia ga-
analizebuli da Sexedos mas garedan, moixelTos igi sxva sagnobrivi Sinaar-
sis mqone fenomenebTan mimarTebaSi; meore mxriv, aseTi farTomasStabiani,
metasagnobrivi xedva aZlevs saSualebas kerZo gerontologiur discipli-
nebs, moaxdinon sakuTari kvlevebis adekvaturi integrireba. dRes siberis
fenomenis kvleva gadawyvetisagan Sorsaa.
siberis fenomenis zneobrivi samyaros daxasiaTebisaTvis yuradReba
unda gamaxvildes Semdeg komponentebze:
socialuri statusi, cxovrebis wesis msoflmxedvelobiTi safuZvle-
bi, droiTi aRqmis Secvla, kerZod, warsulis sivrcis gazrda, momavlis ho-
rizontis Seviwroveba, moraluri pasuxismgeblobebisa da valdebulebebis
meqanizmis Sesusteba, realobisa da masze pirovnuli warmodgenebis gawyve-
tis tendencia, sikvdilTan damokidebuleba.
212
postindustriul sazogadoebaSi siberis fenomenis mimarT Rirebule-

biTi damokidebulebis daweva tradiciuli eTikuri RirebulebiTi sistemis
gauqmebis niSania.
siberis droiTi sazRvrebi pirobiTia da arsebiTad varirebs subkul-
turuli da individualuri gansxvavebebis gaTvaliswinebiT. siberis gan-
sazRvrisaTvis saWiroa mxedvelobaSi gvqondes adamianis socialuri ro-
lisa da statusis mniSvneloba. sociokulturul faqtors biologiurTan
mimarTebiT dominanti roli ukavia.
sibere unda gavigoT, rogorc adamianuri bunebis samive elementis:
sulis, sxeulis da safSvinvelis momcveli fenomeni da misi analizi unda
moxdes am elementebis urTierTobis konteqstSi. am midgomis farglebSi
sibere warmogvidgeba mdgomareobad, romelic araa damokidebuli mxolod
biologiur, fsiqologiur da socialur procesebze. is upirvelesad gar-
kveuli diskursis RirebulebaTa sistemiTaa determinirebuli. amgvarad,
SesaZlebelia vilaparakoT calkeuli elementebis suli, sxeuli, safSvin-
veli siberis specifikaze da imazec, rom sicocxlis sxvadasxva periodSi
siberes axasiaTebs rogorc regresuli, ise progresuli inversia.
zneobriv-socialuri rigis dadebiTi momentebis realizaciisaTvis
saWiroa rogorc subieqturi, ise obieqturi pirobebi. subieqtur pirobebSi
igulisxmeba Tavad adamianis nebelobiTi unarebi. pirovnebazea damokide-
buli aqtivobis maRali done, optimisturi ganwyobebi, cnobierebis sinaT-
le, sicocxlis xalisi, problemaTa mizanmimarTulad gadawyvetis unaris
SenarCuneba. obieqtur pirobebs rac Seexeba, aq gasaTvaliswinebelia sa-
kiTxis mimarT sazogadoebrivi da saxelmwifoebrivi politika.
SesaZlo asakobrivi frustraciebis Tavidan acileba SesaZlebelia si-
beris zneobrivi Rirebulebis sazrisis gacnobierebisa da win wamowevis Sem-
TxvevaSi.
literatura:
1. platoni. saxelmwifo. Tb., 2003.

2. kinikosTa anTologia. m..: 1984.
3. nemediusi, emeseli episkoposi. adamianuri bunebis Sesaxeb. p. 1904.
4. ciceroni. werilebi sibereze, megobrobaze, pasuxismgeblobebze. m.1993.
5. wm. grigoli RvTismetyveli. Txz. 2 tomad. t.1. wm. samebis sergis lavra.
1994.
6. . . .8, .1988
7. . (). ..1994
8. . . . .1998
213
9. .. . // ..
. . .: 1994.
10. . . .: 1987.
11. beri paisi mTawmindelis werilebidan. Tb., 2009.
12. . . . 1-11. ., 1979.
13. Habermas U. Die Zukunft der menschlichen Natur. Auf dem Weg zu einer liberalen Eugenik?
Glauben und Wissen., 2001.
14. Francis Scott Key Fitzgerald. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button and Other Jazz Age
Stories. Penguin Classics. 2008.
15. Jean Baudrillard. Lechange symbolique et la mort. Gallimard.1976
16. -. . / . . . . //
. X. ., 1990. . 150-168
17. sulxan-saba orbeliani. leqsikoni qarTuli. tomi II. Tb., 1992.
18. Yalom Irvin. Existential Psychotherapy. Basic Books; 1980
ANASTASIA ZAKARIADZE
Anno Domini-Phenomenon of Oldness
Summary
The paper aims to discuss Anno Domini-phenomenon of oldness in the perspective of ethi-
cal discourse. It tries to destroy the stereotype that oldness is not an issue of ethics, and that only
natural sciences should be occupied with this problem.
The major objectives of the study are to describe the phenomenon of oldness in the per-
spective of moral dimension, to show it from the anti-naturalistic position. The issue is studied
in the context of cultural, psycho-sociological and bioethical frameworks. The study specifically
addresses such questions as various definitions and essence of old age, mortality of human being
and eternity of his existence, biological structure of man and his nature, the measure of age, youth
and immortality, contemporary biomedical technologies of humans organism stimulation, issues
of prolongation of life, pros and cons of mans biophysical rejuvenation and reasons that explain
why modern society tends to be prejudiced against oldness, phenomenon of oldness in Christia-
nity, the issue of death and dying and how it is solved in the perspective of Christian ethics.
Ancient cultures commonly associated old age with wisdom. The present study was un-
dertaken with the assumption that in the history of philosophy there is a wide range of attitudes
and images of aging which, if critically examined in the light of modern views, have many con-
troversies.
214
Old age as a culturally constructed phenomenon is part of the mechanism of learning to

cope with aging and all that it entails.
It is the last stage of the normal life span in human beings. The term old age has a dual
definition. The first is the last stage in the life processes of an individual, and the second is an age
group or generation comprising a segment of the oldest members of the population. However,
there is no universally accepted age that is considered old among or within societies; because of
inconsistencies as to what age a society may consider old and what members in that society may
be considered old. In many preliterate or traditional societies, chronological time has little or no
importance for the meaning of old age. Everybody is sooner or later bound to become old. We
have to understand the beauty of old age, and we have to understand the freedom of old age; we
have to understand its tremendous detachment from all things that go on in the lives of people
who are still young.
Old age is mans own creation. It all depends how deeply a human being is ready to accept
existence, whatsoever it brings.
We do not age because our minds or our bodies want to, but because we explain changes
in our thinking and physical processes with the category of age. One way of understanding
such changes is to decipher them as the signs of ageing. The first premise of constructionist age-
ing studies can therefore be the fact that age does not have an objective existence of its own.
From this follows the second premise of constructionist ageing studies: Age is made or done
by people in their daily interactions with real or imagined others. It is not done alone, but within
social constraints. The terms that make up ones age are outside oneself, in a society that has no
single author. This leads to the third premise of constructionist ageing studies: Age has tangible
consequences for peoples lives. The idea that age is socially constructed does not mean that age
is not real or that you just have to think young to be young.
Aging is a difficult stage in human life, due to the limitations it imposes and the nearness
to death.
In order to characterize the moral world of oldness, the paper pays attention to the follo-
ving components: social status, world out-looking foundations of rule and style of life, changing
the temporal perception, namely by widening the past and narrowing the horizon of the future,
attitude towards death. The reduction of axiological relations towards the phenomenon of ol-
dness in postindustrial society is a sign of abolition of the ethical system of traditional values.
While defining oldness, the importance of social role and status of human must be in
charge. The social-cultural factor dominates over biological. Oldness has to be understood as a
unity of all the three elements of human nature: body, soul and spirit, and it must be analysed
in the context of interrelation of all these elements. In this frame, oldness appears before us as
a phenomenon that depends not only on biological, psychological and social processes. First of
all, it is determined by a certain cultural value system. So, we could say that in different periods
of life, oldness is characterized as both regressive and progressive inversion. Accents made on
the positive essence of oldness in Christian ethics must not be identified with any form of geron-
tocracy. Possible age frustrations may be avoided by advancement and recognition of the moral
essence of oldness.
215
axali Targmanebi
NEW TRANSLATIONS
jibran xalil jibrani
skalpeli da saanesTezio saSualebebi
is eqstremistia Tavisi TiTqmis giJuri principebiT!

is fantazioria, axalgazrda Taobis zneobis gasaryvnelad rom
wers!
daqorwinebuli da dauqorwinebeli kacebi da qalebi qorwinebaze
jibranis ideebs rom ahyvnen, ojaxis safuZvlebs Ziri gamoeTxreba, sazoga-
doebis institutebis nagebobebi CamoiSleba, es qveyana jojoxeTad iqceva,
misi mkvidrni ki eSmakebad.
mis samwerlobo stilSi silamaze naZaladevia, radgan is kacobrio-
bis mteria!
is anarqistia, urwmuno da eretikosi! Cven vurCevT am dalocvili,
RvTivkurTxeuli mTis mcxovrebT, zurgi aqcion mis moZRvrebas da dawvan
misi wignebi, raTa araferi daaCndes iqidan maT sulebs!
ukve wavikiTxeT misi `damtvreuli frTebi~ da es aris kupris wveTi
Taflis kasrSi.
***
es mxolod nawilia imisa, rasac xalxi Cemze laparakobs da isini mar-
Tlebi arian me sigiJemde misuli eqstremisti var, dangrevisken iseve var
midrekili, rogorc Senebisken! Cems gulSi siZulvilia imisa, rasac xalxi
wmindad miiCnevs da siyvaruli imisa, rasac isini miuReblad Tvlian. rom
SemeZlos, ise amovZirkvavdi maT wes-Cveulebebs, rwmenebsa da tradiciebs,
wuTiT ar Sevyoymandebodi! zogi rom ambobs, TiTqos Cemi wigni kupris wve-
Tia Taflis kasrSi, es naTqvami sqeli niRbis miRma damalul WeSmaritebas
aaSkaravebs, SiSveli WeSmariteba ki aseTia me ar vurev erTmaneTSi kuprs
da Tafls, aramed, ubralod, Camovasxam maT... da Camovasxam sufTa, gamWvir-
vale WiqebSi.
isini ki, vinc Tavs maridebs Cemgan sulebis gadasarCenad da amboben,
rom fantaziori var da RrublebSi davfrinav, swored isini arian, vinc
216
jibran xalil jibrani _ skalpeli da saanesTezio saSualebebi
Tvalmoucileblad misCerebian am gamWvirvale WiqaTa elvarebas, magram ga-

urbian sasmels, rac maTSia da mas kuprs eZaxian, radgan maTi uRono kuWebi
mas ver inelebs.
es winasityvaoba mowmobs mouridebel usircxvobas, magram gana utif-
roba Tavisi mourideblobiT ar sjobs natif muxanaTobas?! utifroba xom
Tavis Tavs avlens maSin, roca muxanaToba sxvis Targze moWril samosSia ga-
mowyobili.
***
aRmosavlelebi mwerlisgan iTxoven, futkariviT iyos, mindor-vels
rom dastrialebs da yvavilTa neqtars agrovebs Taflis fiWis dasamzadeb-
lad.
aRmosavlelebs uyvarT Tafli da mis garda sxva saWmels gemos ver
atanen, uzomod geaxlebian mas im doziT, rom Tavadac Taflad gadaiqcnen,
cecxlze rom dneba da mxolod yinulSi Cadebuli mkvrivdeba.
aRmosavlelebi poetisgan moiTxoven, sakuTari Tavi sakmevlad ukmios
maT sultnebs, mmarTvelebs da patriarqebs. aRmosavleTis zeca im sakmev-
lis kvamliTaa Seburuli, samarxebs, sakurTxevlebs da taxt-sabrZaneblebs
yoveli mxridan rom asdiT, magram aRmosavlelebi amiT rodi kmayofilde-
bian! Cvens dRevandelobaSi panegiristebi al-muTanabbis1 hbaZaven da ejib-
rebian, natiralis mTxzvelni al-xansas2 aWarbeben da mWermetyvelni ufro
enawylianni arian, vidre safi ad-din al-hilli.3
aRmosavlelebi mecnierisgan moiTxoven, Tavisi mama-papis istoria ik-
vlios, maTi nakvalevi da maTi danatovari Zeglebi Seiswavlos, maTi adaT-
Cveulebebi! Tavisi dReni da Rameni maT enebze daweril kasidebs,4 maTi leq-
sikis etimologias, maTi ritorikis korpuss Sealios.
aRmosavlelebi moazrovnisgan moiTxoven, maT yurTa gasagonad imeo-
ros baidabas,5 ibn ruSdis,6 efrem sirielisa7 da ioane damaskelis8 naubari,
sakuTar wignSi ki ar gascdes suleluri Segonebisa da ususuri Wkuis dari-
gebis farglebs da im `sibrZnesa~ da `saswaulebs~, am ors Soris rom ibadeba,
romelsac Tu mihyva kaci, misi cxovreba CrdilSi amosul damWknar balaxs
daemsgavseba, misi suli ki opiumnarev dubela wyals.
1
al-muTanabbi X s-is cnobili arabi poeti, panegiristi.
2
al-xansa VI-VII ss. arabi poeti qali, glovis leqsebiT cnobili.
3
safi ad-din al-hilli XIV s-is popularuli arabi poeti.
4
kasida arabuli saleqso forma.
5
baidaba arabizirebuli saxeli legendaruli indoeli brZenisa, viSnu-Sar-
manisa, romelic `qilila da damanas~ teqstSi figurirebs.
6
ibn ruSdi XII s-is cnobili arabi filosofosi.
7
efrem sirieli IV-V ss. cnobili qristiani RvTismetyveli.
8
ioane damaskeli VII-VIII ss. bizantieli RvTismetyveli da filosofosi.
217
mokled rom vTqvaT, aRmosavlelebi gardasuli warsulis scenebSi

cxovroben, pasiur-negatiuri TavSesaqcev-gasarTobebisken aqvT miswrafe-
ba, sZulT pozitiuri, ganyenebuli da abstraqtuli moZRvrebebi da prin-
cipebi, romlebic susxavs maT da mSvidi sizmrebiT moculi Rrma Zilisgan
afxizlebs.
***
marTlac, aRmosavleTi avadaa. misi qronikuli daavadebebi periodu-
lad mwvavdeba da drodadro epidemiebi moicavs xolme iqamde, rom is ukve
Seguebulia sakuTar avadmyofur mdgomareobasa da aTasobiT tkivils, bu-
nebriv mdgomareobad aRiqvams Tavis sneulebebsa da tkivilebs; ufro me-
tic, ise uyurebs maT, rogorc keTilSobil sulTa da janmrTel sxeulTa
Tandayolil keTil Tvisebebs da visac es ar aqvs, is naklovnad miiCneva, ze-
ciur niWsa da srulyofilebas moklebulad.
aRmosavleTs bevri eqimi mkurnalobs. isini mis sawols ar Sordebian
da konsiliumze mis sakiTxs ganixilaven, magram mxolod droebiTi efeqtis
mqone saanesTezio saSualebebiT wamloben, rac axangrZlivebs avadmyofo-
bis dros da ar ki kurnavs mas!
am moralur da sulier saanesTezio saSualebebs rac Seexeba, mraval-
saxovani da mravalferovania, isini erTimeoris miyolebiT Cndebian da ise
enacvlebian erTmaneTs, rogorc sxvadasxva sneuleba da daavadeba. rogorc
ki axali avadmyofoba iCens Tavs aRmosavleTSi, aRmosavleTis eqimebi mis-
Tvis maSinve axal saanesTezio saSualebas aRmoaCenen xolme.
mizezebi, romlebsac saanesTezio saSualebebis gamoyenebisken mivya-
varT, mravalia. maTgan yvelaze mTavari isaa, rom avadmyofi mTlianad emor-
Cileba gangebisa da bedisweris winaswarganCinebulobis cnobil filosofi-
as, eqimebi ki simxdales iCenen da SiSoben, rom efeqturi wamlebis gamoyene-
bas tkivilis gamwvaveba mohyveba.
axla warmogidgenT im saanesTezio da damawynarebeli saSualebebis ma-
galiTebs, romlebsac aRmosavleli eqimebi mimarTaven ojaxuri, erovnuli
da religiuri avadmyofobebisas:
kaci cols ver itans da coli qmars cxovrebiseuli pirobiTobebis mi-
zeziT. erTmaneTSi kinklaoben, Cxuboben da erTmaneTs dascildebian. mag-
ram dRe-Ramec ar gaivlis da kacis sanaTesao Seiyreba qalis sanaTesaosTan
erTad, enamoqargul azrebsa da Selamazebul ideebs gacvlian erTmaneTSi
da SeTanxmdebian, mSvidoba Camoagdon col-qmars Soris. moiyvanen cols da
misi emociebis da grZnobebis sacduneblad iseTi cru SegonebebiT aavseben,
qals sircxviliT rom awiTlebs, magram ver arwmunebs. Semdeg qmars moiwve-
ven da Tavs gamouWedaven moqarguli sityvebiTa da magaliTebiT, romlebic
mis azrebs ki daiyoliebs da Searbilebs, magram ver cvlis. ai, ase miiRweva
218
jibran xalil jibrani _ skalpeli da saanesTezio saSualebebi
Serigeba droebiTi mSvidoba sulierad erTmaneTTan SeuTavsebel col

-qmars Soris, romlebic sakuTari nebis sawinaaRmdegod erT WerqveS cxov-
rebas ubrundebian, sanam Sesaferadebeli saSualeba ar gamoxundeba da im
saanesTezio saSualebis moqmedeba ar gaivlis, naTesav-axloblebma rom ga-
moiyenes. qmari kvlav gamoxatavs Tavis zizRs da autanlobas colis mimarT,
coli ki kvlav fardas axdis Tavis ubedur mdgomareobas! magram isini, vinc
Serigebis gza monaxes pirvel jerze, meoredac pouloben mas. visac saanes-
Tezio saSualebebis erT ylupi mouwrupavs, mere ukve savse Wiqis daleva-
zec ar ambobs uars!
xalxis nawili aujanydeba usamarTlo mTavrobas an moZvelebul re-
Jims, Seqmnian sareformo asociacias, romelic miznad isaxavs ganviTarebasa
da Tavisuflebas. mamacurad gamodian sityviT, weren mgznebared, aqveyneben
wesdebebsa da programebs, agzavnian delegaciebsa da warmomadgenlebs, mag-
ram ar gaivlis erTi-ori Tve da vigebT, rom mTavrobam daapatimra asocia-
ciis meTauri an Tanamdeboba Caabara mas. sareformo asociaciis Sesaxeb ki
ukve aRaraferi ismis, radgan mis wevrebs cotaodeni cnobili saanesTezio
saSualebebi gausinjavT da kvlav simSvidesa da morCilebis mdgomareobas
dabrunebian.
religiuri Temi Tavis meTaurs aujanydeba principuli sakiTxebis ga-
mo; akritikebs mis pirovnebas da kicxavs mis saqmeebs; SeSfoTebulia misi
kursiT; Semdeg emuqreba mas sxva, ufro gonivruli, iluziebisa da crur-
wmenebisgan ufro Tavisufali religiuri mimdinareobis miRebiT! magram
mcire droc ar gaivlis da vigebT, rom qveynis gonierma xalxma aRmofxvra
dapirispireba samwysosa da mis moZRvars Soris da jadosnuri saanesTezio
saSualebebis wyalobiT mrevls mowiweba daubruna misi meTauris pirovne-
bis mimarT, urC qveSevrdomTa sulebs ki brma morCileba!
susti Cagruli Zlieri mCagvrelis tiranias uCivis, magram mezobeli
eubneba: dadumdi, isars Tu Tvals gausworeb, gamogTxris!
soflels eWvi Seaqvs berebis RvTismosaobasa da gulwrfelobaSi da
sxva glexi eubneba: iyuCe, wminda werilSi xom naTqvamia: ismineT maTi sityve-
bi da nu gaimeorebT maT qmedebebs!
mowafe uars ambobs basreli da qufeli gramatikosebis9 wesebis daze-
pirebaze, maswavlebeli ki eubneba: zarmacebi da mconarebi codvaze ufro
maxinj Tavis gasamarTlebel mizezebs igoneben!
axalgazrda gogona uarsaa, ZvelTa Cveulebebs misdios da deda ki eub-
neba: qaliSvili dedaze ukeTesi ver iqneba da ra gzasac me vedeqi, Senc im
gzas daadgebi!
9
igulisxmeba Sua saukuneebis arabuli saenaTmecniero skolebi q. qufasa da
basraSi, romelTac erTmaneTisgan gansxvavebuli gramatikuli moZRvrebebi
Camoayalibes.
219
axalgazrda kaci religiuri dogmebis mniSvnelobaTa axsnas iTxovs,

RvTismsaxuri ki eubneba: is, vinc rwmenis TvaliT ar iyureba, amqveynad yve-
lafers mxolod nislsa da burusSi xedavs!
ase gadis dReebi Rameebis kvaldakval. aRmosavleli Tavis rbil sa-
wolze nebivrobs. wuTiT gamoiRviZebs, roca rwyilebi dakbenen, Semdeg isev
leTargiul Zils miscems Tavs im saanesTezio saSualebebis ZaliT, romelic
mis sisxls Serevia da ZarRvebSi uvlis. Tuki movida kaci vinme da SeuZaxa
mZinareT, maTi sacxovrisebi, taZrebi da sasamarTloebi xmauriT aavso, sa-
ukuno Tvlemamoreul quTuToebs gaaxelen da nel-nela gamofxizlebulni
ikiTxaven: ra uxeSi ymawvilia! arc TviTon iZinebs da arc xalxs aZlevs Zilis
saSualebas! Semdeg Tvalebs isev daxuWaven da gulSi, sakuTari Tavis gasa-
gonad waiCurCuleben: es uRmerTo eretikosi axalgazrda Taobis zneobas
ryvnis, TaobaTa nageb institutebs angrevs da kacobriobas Sxamian isrebs
esvris!
araerTgzis mikiTxavs Cemi TavisTvis, var ki me im gamofxizlebul ajan-
yebulTa Soris, romlebic uars arian, dalion saanesTezio da damawynarebe-
li saSualebebi?! Cemi gulisxma mpasuxobs Sefaruli, gaurkveveli da oraz-
rovani sityvebiT, magram, rodesac movismine, rogor lanZRavs xalxi Cems
saxels da sZagT Cemi principebi, davrwmundi Cems WeSmarit gamoRviZebaSi da
Sevityve, rom me ar vekuTvni sasiamovno zmanebebsa da tkbil sizmrebs min-
dobilTa ricxvs, piriqiT, im mcirericxovan martosulTa Soris var, visac
cxovreba ekliTa da yvaviliT mofenil, mtacebeli mglebiTa da mgalobeli
bulbulebiT garemocul viwro gzaze atarebs.
gamoRviZeba Rirseba da keTili Tviseba rom yofiliyo, mokrZaleba da
zrdiloba nebas ar momcemda, ase dameCemebina, magram is mxolod saTnoeba
ki ara, sakvirveli WeSmaritebaa, moulodnelad rom gamoecxadeba xolme
martosul individebs, win Cauvlis da isinic Tavisdauneburad gaedevnebi-
an xolme mas, misi uxilavi Zafebi izidavT da mis didebul arss daJinebiT,
Tvalmoucileblad miSterebian.
Cemi azriT, mokrZalebuloba subieqturi WeSmaritebebis gamoxatva-
Si wminda wylis farisevlobaa, aRmosavlelebTan aRzrda-ganaTlebad rom
iwodeba.
***
xval moazrovne literatorni waikiTxaven imas, rac ki gamova asparez-
ze da gaRizianebulni ityvian: is eqstremistia, cxovrebas mxolod bneli
mxridan uyurebs da ukunis mets verafers xedavs! didi xania, rac Camdgara
CvenSi da mosTqvams da godebs, dagvtiris, oxravs da kvnesis Cveni mdgomare-
obis gamo.
am moazrovne literatorT vetyodi: me davtiri aRmosavleTs, radgan
micvalebulis kubosTan cekva sruli sigiJea!
220
jibran xalil jibrani _ Cven da Tqven
me vtiri aRmosavlelebs, radgan avadmyofobis dacinva sruli ugunu-

rebaa!
me am sayvareli qveynebis gamo movTqvam, radgan ubedurebis pirispir
simRera uWkuoba da sibrmavea.
me eqstremisti var, radgan is, vinc zomierebas iCens WeSmaritebis ga-
momJRavnebaSi, mxolod naxevar simarTles ambobs, meore naxevars ki malavs
xalxis azrisa da laybobis SiSiT.
vxedav ayrolebul gvams da Sinaganad mZags, gul-muceli mitrialebs
da ar SemiZlia mis gverdiT jdoma marjvena xelSi sasmelis bokaliT da mar-
cxenaSi tkbileulis naWriT.
Tu moiZeveba vinme, visac surs Cemi tirilis sicilad gadaqceva, Cemi
zizRisa keTilganwyobad, Cemi eqstremizmisa ki zomierebad, man unda miC-
venos aRmosavlelTa Soris samarTliani mmarTveli, patiosani kanonmdebe-
li, religiuri meTauri, romelic moZRvrebis mixedviT moqmedebs da qmari,
romelic cols iseTive TvaliT uyurebs, rogoriTac sakuTar Tavs.
Tu moiZeveba vinme, visac surs, mnaxos mocekvave da momisminos, rogor
vukrav dolze da salamurze, man unda mixmos sasiZos saxlSi, sasaflaoze ki
ar gamaCeros!
arabulidan Targmna darejan gardavaZem

krebulidan `qariSxlebi~
Cven da Tqven
Cven sevdis Zeni varT da Tqven ki sixarulis!

Cven sevdis Zeni varT da sevda RvTis Crdilia, romelic ar sufevs bo-
rot gulTa mezoblobaSi. Cven mwuxare sulebi gvaqvs da es Wmunva imdenad
didia, rom mas ver iteven patara sulebi. Cven vtiriT da vgodebT, o, moci-
narno! vinc sakuTari cremliT erTxel mainc ganbanila, is darCeba wmindad
ukunisamde!
Tqven Cven ar gvicnobT, Cven ki gicnobT Tqven. Tqven cxovrebis mdina-
ris nakadis siswrafiT modixarT da Cvenken arc ki iyurebiT, Cven ki vsxed-
varT napirze, gimzerT da gismenT. Tqven ar gesmiT Cveni godeba, radgan
dReTa xmaurs gamouWedavs Tqveni yurebi, Cven ki gvesmis Tqveni simRerebi,
radgan RameTa CurCuls gauxsnia CvenTvis yurTasmena. Cven gxedavT Tqven,
radgan Tqven bnel sinaTleSi dgaxarT, Tqven ki ver gvxedavT, radgan Cven
ganaTebul bnelSi vsxedvarT.
221
Cven sevdis Zeni varT, winaswarmetyvelni varT, poetni da musikosni.

Cven gulTa CvenTa simebiT vwnavT RvTaebaTa Sesamosels, Cveni gulis mar-
cvlebiT vuvsebT angelozebs peSvebs maSin, roca Tqven, Tqven siameTa uz-
runvelobis Zeni xarT da garTobis gamWriaxobis! Tqven Tqvens gulebs sica-
rieles uZRvniT, radgan sicarielis TiTebi nazad da, moqnilad gexebian da
umecrebis maxloblad daivaneben, rameTu umecrebis saxli sarkes moklebu-
lia, romelSic Tqvens saxeebs dainaxavdiT.
Cven voxravT da am oxvrasTan erTad nel-nela matulobs yvavilTa
CurCuli, rtoTa Sriali, nakadulTa CuxCuxi, Tqven ki iciniT da Tqveni si-
cil-kiskisi SeerTvis Tavis qalaTa Cxaruns, borkilTa JRaruns, ufskrul-
Ta kivils.
Cven vtiriT da Cveni cremlebi cxovrebis gulSi Caedineba ise, rogorc
cvari swydeba Ramis quTuToebs da dilas gulze daepkureba. Tqven ki iRime-
biT da Tqveni momRimari bageTa kuTxeebidan cinizmi iRvreba imgvarad, ro-
gorc iqednes Sxami daedineba dageslilis Wrilobas.
Cven vtiriT, radgan vxedavT qvriv-oblis ubedurebas, Tqven ki iciniT,
radgan verafers xedavT oqros elvarebis garda! Cven vtiriT, radgan gves-
mis Ratakis kvnesa, Cagrulis gminva, Tqven ki iciniT, radgan bokalTa wkaru-
nis meti ara geyurebaT ra.
Cven vtiriT, radgan Cveni sulebi RvTis nebiT sxeulebs gaSorebian,
Tqven ki iciniT, radgan Tqveni sxeulni, nasiamovnebni, miwas ekvrian.
***
Cven sevdis Zeni varT da Tqven ki sixarulis. maS, modi, mzis sinaTle-
ze gamovitanoT wyaroni Cveni sevdisa da saqmeni Tqveni siamisa!
Tqven aageT piramidebi monaTa Tavis qalebiT da piramidebi, axla rom
silaze ganisveneben, Taobebs uyvebian Cvens ukvdavebasa da Tqvens warmavlo-
baze. Cven davamxeT bastilia Tavisufal adamianTa xelebiT da bastilia is
sityva gaxda, romelsac imeoreben erebi, gvlocaven Cven da gwyevlian Tqven!
Tqven zeatyorcneT babilonis baRebi uZlurTa ConCxebze da nineviis sasax-
leebi wamoWimeT tanjulTa samarxebze! da ai, babiloni da ninevia aqlemTa
fexis kvals damsgavsebian udabnos silaze. Cven ki gamovaqandakeT iSTari10
marmarilosgan da usulo marmarilo avaTrToleT da usityvod avametyve-
leT!
qnarze avaJRereT nahavandis11 hangi da qnarma kosmosSi moxetiale Sey-
varebulTa sulebi gamoixmo. Cven movxateT mariami StrixebiT da ferebiT
10
iSTari (aqaduri RvTaeba) siyvarulis, nayofierebisa da omis qalRmerTi asu-
reTsa da babilonSi.
11
nahavandi minoruli hangis nairsaxeoba arabul musikaSi, sparsuli warmoSo-
bis. jibrans igi aRwerili aqvs Tavis `musikis wignSi~.
222
jibran xalil jibrani _ Cven da Tqven
da es Strixebi RvTaebaTa fiqrebs daemsgavsa, ferebi ki angelozTa grZno-

bebs.
Tqven garTobas misdevT da garTobis klanWebs aTasobiT aTasi mowame
daufleTavT romisa da antioqiis TeatronebSi. Cven ki vcdilobT, simSvi-
des mivdioT, simSvidis TiTebs dauwnavT iliada, iobis wigni da àT-Taia-l-
qubra~.12
Tqven vnebebTan iyofT sarecels da vnebaTa qariSxlebs qalTa sule-
bis aTasobiT xomaldi gadauCexavs sircxvilisa da garyvnilebis ufskrul-
Si. Cven martoobas vexutebiT. martoobaSi Seisxa xorci muallakebma, ham-
letis istoriam, dantes poemam! Tqven Jins da gulisTqmas ebaasebiT da Jinis
da gulisTqmis maxvilebs ki sisxlis aTasobiT mdinare dauRvriaT. Cven zma-
nebebs varT adevnebulni da zmanebaTa xeliT zegardmovlinda codna uzena-
esi sinaTlis wridan.
***
Cven sevdis Zeni varT da Tqven ki sixarulis. Cvens sevdasa da Tqvens
sixaruls Soris Znelad savali zRudeebia, viwro gadasasvlelebiT, romel-
sac ver gadalaxaven Tqveni Cinebuli cxenebi, ver gaivlian masze Tqveni la-
mazi ekipaJebi.
Cven gvebraleba Tqveni sipatarave, Tqven ki gZulT Cveni didebule-
ba! Cvens sibralulsa da Tqvens siZulvils Soris dro dgas, gancvifrebuli
TqveniT da CveniT.
Cven giaxlovdebiT, rogorc megobrebi da Tqven ki Tavs gvesxmiT, ro-
gorc mtrebi. megobrobasa da siZulvils Soris Rrma ufskrulia, cremliTa
da sisxliT savse!
Cven sasaxleebs gigebT da Tqven samareebs gviTxriT. sasaxlis silama-
zesa da samaris ukuneTs Soris ki kacobrioba daabijebs rkinis nabijebiT.
Cven Tqven gzad vardebs gifenT, Tqven ki sarecels ekliT gvivsebT,
vardis furclebsa da eklebs Soris ki Rrma, maradiuli ZiliT sZinavs WeS-
maritebas.
dasabamidan ebrZviT Cvens damyol, moqnil Zalas Tqveni uxeSi sisus-
tiT. gvZlevT mcire xniT da gaxarebulni ayiyindebiT bayayebiviT, gjabniT
saukunod da mainc Cumad varT, goliaTebiviT! Tqven jvars acviT ieso naza-
reveli, mis garSemo ideqiT, mas dascinodiT da lanZRva-ginebiT iklebdiT,
magram, roca im drom da saaTma gadaiara, is gadmovida Tavisi jvridan da ga-
iara, rogorc goliaTma, saukuneebi daZlia Tavisi suliTa da WeSmaritebiT
da dedamiwa aavso Tavisi didebiTa da silamaziT.
12
àT-Taia-l-qubra~ XII-XIII ss. sufi arabi poetis ibn al-faridis cnobili ka-
sida (mistikuri gza).
223
Tqven mowamleT sokrate da qvebiT CaqoleT pavle! mokaliT galilei

da gaanadgureT ali ibn abu talibi.13 Tqven CamoaxrCeT midhaT faSa14 da ese-
ni cocxloben axla, rogorc triumfatori gmirebi maradisobis pirispir.
Tqven ki kacobriobis xsovnaSi cxovrobT, rogorc miwis pirze dayrili gva-
mebi, romlebic vervis naxuloben iseTs, vinc damarxavda maT daviwyebisa da
ararsebobis sibneleSi!
Cven sevdis Zeni varT da sevda is Rrubelia, romelic samyaros sikeTed
da codnad awvims, Tqven ki sixarulis Zeni xarT da ra maRalic ar unda iyos
Tqveni sixaruli, is mainc kvamlis svetebiviTaa, romelsac CamoSlis qari da
fantavs nivTieri elementebi.
arabulidan Targmna darejan gardavaZem

krebulidan `qariSxlebi~
darejan gardavaZe
jibran xalil jibranis ori mxatvrul-filosofiuri esse
libanis mTebisa da libanuri kedris Semdeg libanis mesame simbolod

qceuli udidesi moazrovne jibran xalil jibrani (1883-1931), maroniti li-
baneli, is arabi mweralia, romelmac axal arabul literaturas arnaxuli
popularoba SesZina ara mxolod arabul samyaroSi, aramed dasavleTSi. di-
di literatori da mxatvari, siriul-amerikuli literaturul-filosofi-
uri skolis erT-erTi burji im iSviaT orenovan mweralTagania, romelTa
mxatvruli Semoqmedeba orive enaze erTnair simaRleebs aRwevs. mas bedma
arguna libansa da amerikas, aRmosavleTsa da dasavleTs, Soris gade-
buli cxovrebis gza,15 ramac jibran xalil jibranis msoflmxedvelobas,
13
ali ibn abu talibi winaswarmetyvel muhamedis biZaSvili da siZe, meoTxe
marTlmorwmune xalifa, SiitTa pirveli imami. mokles 661 w-s.
14
midhaT faSa XIX s-is osmaleTis imperiis prodasavluri reformatori,
saxelmwifo moRvawe.
15
jibran xalil jibrani CrdiloeT libanis patara, mTian sofel biSaraSi dai-
bada. kedrebis tyiT dafarulma mTis Tovlianma mwvervalebma, araamqveyniuri
peizaJebiT moculma garemom da mkacrma mTis cxovrebam uZlieresi energetika
SesZina mis mxatvrul poetikasa da azrovnebas. dawyebiTi ganaTleba mSobliur
sofelSi miiRo, Tumca, mamis sikvdilis Semdeg, jer kidev sruliad bavSvi,
amerikaSi emigrirebul libanelTa talRaSi aRmoCnda, radgan dedamiss bos-
224
darejan gardavaZe _ jibran xalil jibranis ori mxatvrul-filosofiuri esse
mis sulier samyaros waruSleli kvali daatyo da igi ori kulturis aR-
mosavlurisa da dasavluris WeSmarit Svilad Camoayaliba. gadauWarbeb-
lad SeiZleba iTqvas, rom meoce saukunis arabul mwerlobaSi jibran xalil
jibranis mxatvruli Semoqmedeba yvelaze mWidrodaa dakavSirebuli dasav-
lur kulturasa da filosofiasTan. araerTi mkvlevari aRniSnavs fridrix
nicSes msoflmxedvelobasTan jibranis SexedulebaTa siaxloves.16 es gav-
lena gansakuTrebiT Zlieria 1908-10 wlebSi jibranis safrangeTSi cxovre-
bis dros, roca is gatacebulia nicSes èse ityoda zaraTuStras~ ideebiT
da es gataceba mis krebul `qariSxlebSic~ aisaxeba. `mesaflaveSi~ jibrani
nicSes zekacis msgavs tipaJs qmnis SeSlili RmerTis saxiT, romelic po-
ets xvdeba da esaubreba. cxovrebisa da Semoqmedebis garkveul etapze nic-
Ses gavlenis miuxedavad, isic aucileblad unda iTqvas, rom jibran xalil
jibranis mwerlobisTvis zogadad damaxasiaTebelia Rrma religiuroba da,
erTgvarad, sufiuri mistikis anarekli. sikvdiliT sikvdilis damamarcxe-
beli, jvarcmuli iesos xateba da misi siZliere jibranis bevri nawarmoebis
STagonebadaa qceuli. es gansakuTrebiT mis inglisurenovan TxzulebaSi
ìeso Ze kacisa~ Cans, aseve mis mxatvrul esseSi `winaswarmetyveli~, rom-
lis Sesaxeb Tavad mwerali ambobda: èsaa Cemi aRmsarebloba, Cemi cxovrebis
xelSeuxebeli siwminde. visurvebdi, is erT-erT eklesiaSi wamekiTxa...~ `Tu
poetebi riTmebs zRvisgan iReben, Cemi Txzulebis riTma wminda wignebidan
modis~.17 sxvaTa Soris, jibran xalil jibranis arnaxul popularobasa da
aRiarebas imanac Seuwyo xeli, rom is, mwerlobis garda, mxatvrobasac mis-
devda. mis naxatebSi mkvlevrebi aRniSnaven uiliam bleikiT gatacebas, ris
tonSi naTesavebi hyavda. bostonis Cinur kvartalSi dawyebuli gaWirvebuli

cxovreba mwerals aRmosavleT-dasavleTis gzebze daatarebs. inglisuri ga-
naTlebis paralelurad, arabuli enis codnis gasaRrmaveblad is 1897 w. li-
banSi brundeba. sul raRac ramdenime weliwadSi ojaxuri tragedia (dedis,
disa da Zmis WleqiT sikvdili) daatyda mwerals Tavs da tkivilma waruSleli
kvali daasva mis suls, Tumca, tkivilis esTetikas swored rom kaTarsisuli
funqcia hqonda jibranis cxovrebasa da SemoqmedebaSi. is amerikaSi agrZelebs
cxovrebas, bostonSi, Semdeg niu-iorkSi, garkveuli periodi parizSi eufleba
xatvas. yalibdeba Semoqmedad, romelsac gamoarCevs samyaros miseuli xedva.
misi mxatvruli Txzulebebisa da esseebis siRrme jibran xalil jibrans axali
arabuli literaturis klasikosad aqcevs da arnaxul popularobas uxveWs aR-
mosavleTsa da dasavleTSi. gardaicvala bostonSi, Tumca, sikvdilis mere is
kvlav SeerTvis mis mSobliur, usayvarles libans. is gadmoasvenes da dakrZa-
les libanSi, sof. biSaraSi, soflis monasterSi, saflavis qvaze warweriT: àq
ganisvenebs Cveni mociquli jibrani~.
16
murman quTelia, arabuli romantizmi. gamomcemloba `mwignobari~, Tbilisi,
2009. gv. 42, 52-60.
17
jibran xalil jibrani, winaswarmetyveli, gamomcemloba `qarTuli akademiu-
ri wigni~, Tbilisi, 2013, Targmani da winasityvaoba nino doliZisa. gv. 4-5.
225
gamoc rodenma mas àRmosavleTis bleiki~ uwoda.18 jibran xalil jibranisa

da misi Taobis sxva arab romantikosTa literaturul-esTetikuri Sexedu-
lebani kargad gamovlinda arab emigrantTa sazogadoebis àr-rabita al-ka-
lamias~ saqmianobaSi, romelmac didi roli iTamaSa amerikaSi arabuli li-
teraturis popularizaciaSi da emigrantul wreebSi arabuli kulturuli
faseulobebis Senaxva-SenarCunebaSi.
Cven mier warmodgenili ori mxatvruli ese `skalpeli da saanesTe-
zio saSualebebi~ da `Cven da Tqven~ siRrmiseulad da srulad warmogvid-
gens jibran xalil jibranis mxatvrul esTetikaSi novatorul-modernis-
tul xedvas. `skalpeli da saanesTezio saSualebebi~ Tu aRmosavleTis mi-
seul mwvave Sefasebas gvaZlevs, aRmosavleTisTvis axali sisxlis gadasxmis
aucileblobis, tradiciuli aRmosavluri faseulobebisa da orientirebis
fasaduri, dromoWmuli, daxavsebuli dogmebisgan gaTavisuflebis sakiTxs
svams, maTTvis axali sicocxlis, axali sulis STabervis, aRmosavlur-dasav-
luri kulturuli sinTezis saWiroebas wamoswevs win aRmosavleTis meobis
daukargavad,19 `Cven da Tqven~ pirovnebis individualizaciisa da `mesa~ da
`sxvis~ paradigmaSi, erTi mxriv, individis gamokveTili pirovnulobisa da
identurobis da, meore mxriv, masis, brbos usaxurobis urTierTkontras-
tulobis warmoCenis gziT maT Soris dapirispirebis umaRles xarisxs iZle-
va, rac am or mxares Soris dialogis saSualebas gamoricxavs, SeuZlebels
xdis. orive eseSi Tavad jibran xalil jibranis uZlieresi pirovnuli niSan-
Tvisebebi ikveTeba da mas dinebis sawinaaRmdegod TavganwirviT mocuraved
warmogvidgens.
18
murman quTelia, arabuli romantizmi. gamomcemloba `mwignobari~, Tbilisi,
2009. gv. 42.
19
am kuTxiT is ilia WavWavaZesac ki gvagonebs:
`Cemzed amboben: ìs siaves qarTvlisas ambobs,
Cvens cuds ar malavs, eg xom cxadi siZulvilia!
briyvni amboben, kargi guli ki maSinve scnobs -
am siZulvilSi raodenic siyvarulia!~
226
darejan gardavaZe _ jibran xalil jibranis ori mxatvrul-filosofiuri esse
DAREJAN GARDAVADZE
Two Artistic-Philosophical Essays of Jibran Khalil Jibran
After the mountains of Lebanon and the Lebanese cedar, the greatest thinker Jibran Khalil
Jibran (1883-1931) who became the third symbol of Lebanon, Maronite Lebanese, is the Arab
writer who granted unprecedented popularity to modern Arabic literature both in the Arabic
and Western world. A great literary man and painter, one of the fulcrums of Syrian-American
literary-philosophical school is belongs to such scarce bilingual writers whose creative work
reaches equal heights in both languages. The fate allotted to him the way20 of life which became
a bridge between East and West, which left an indelible trace on the worldview of Jibran Khalil
Jibran and his spiritual world and which helped him to become a true son of two cultures
Eastern and Western. It can be said without any exaggeration that in the Arabic prose of the 20th
c. the creative work of Jibran Khalil Jibran is most closely connected with the western culture
and philosophy. A considerable number of researchers point to the closeness of Jibrans views
with the world-view of Friedrich Nietzsche 21. This phenomenon is especially strong between
1908 and 1910. While living in France, Jibran became interested in the conceptual ideas of
Nietzsches work Thus Spoke Zarathustra and this influence is felt in his collected works
The Storms. In his essay The Grave-digger Jibran creates a prototype of a superman, like
that of Nietzsches, with an image of a crazy God, who meets the poet and speaks to him. It
should necessarily be mentioned that on a definite stage of life and creative work, in spite of
the influence of Nietzsche, the literary works of Jibran Khalil Jibran were characterized by deep
religiosity and some Sufistic mystic reflection. The icon of crucified Jesus and his might became
20
Jibran Khalil Jibran was born in a small, mountainous village of North Lebanon, in the village of
Besharri. The snowy mountain peaks covered with cedar forests, the surroundings full of unearthly
landscapes and the cruel life of the mountains granted to his poetry and thinking the strongest
energetics. He received elementary education in his native school. However, after his fathers
death, still being quite a child Jibran appeared among the Lebanese immigrants in America, as his
mother had relatives in Boston. The writer lived in misery in the Chinese quarter. Life made walk
on East-West roads. Despite the fact that he was getting an English education in the Us, in 1897
Jibran Khalil Jibran returns to Lebanon to deepen his knowledge of the Arabic language. In several
years a family tragedy befell the writer (his sister and brother died of tuberculosis) and this tragedy
left an indelible mark on his soul..At the same time, this sad event had a cathartic effect on his life
and creative work. Jibran stays in Boston and then he moves to New York. He spent some time
mastering in drawing. Here his personality and world outlook were formed.
The depth of his artistic works and essays made Jibran Khalil Jibran a classical writer of the
modern Arabic literature and won him an unbelievable fame in both Eastern and Western worlds.
He died in Boston, however, later his remains were reburied in his beloved Lebanon, in Beshara, in
the village monastery. The inscription on his gravestone reads: Here lies the body of our apostle
Jibran.
21
Murman Qutelia, The Arabic Romanticism, Publishing House Mtsignobari , Tbilisi, 2009,
pp.42,52-60.
227
the inspiration for many of his books. This is especially well shown in an English-language
essay Jesus the Son of Man, as well as in the essay The Prophet, about whom the writer
used to say: This is my confession, the untouchable sanctity of my life. I wish I could read it in
the church If the poets take the rhymes from the sea, the rhyme of my essays comes from
the Holy Books22. Besides, the unprecedented popularity and acknowledgement of Jibran Khalil
Jibran was determined by the fact that in addition to writing, he was fond of painting. In his
paintings the researchers refer to the passion for William Blake because of which Rodin called
him the Blake of the East23. The literary-aesthetic views of Jibran Khalil Jibran and other Arab
romanticists of his generation are well-revealed in the activity of the immigrant society ar-
Rabita al-Qalamia, which played an important role in the popularization of the Arabic literature
in America and in maintaining the cultural values in the society of Arab immigrants.
Two artistic essays presented by us Scalpel and Anesthetic Means and We and
You fully represent an innovative, modern vision in an artistic aesthetics of Jibran Khalil
Jibran. The Scalpel and Anesthetic Means gives a sharp assessment of the East peculiar to
the author; it raises the issue of liberation from the facade, out-of-date, overgrown with moss
dogmas and stresses the necessity of refreshing the blood and traditional Eastern values and
orientations. It also puts forward the necessity to accept the principles of a new life, breeding
in it a new spirit, a cultural synthesis of East and West, without losing the ego of the East24.
The individualization of a person in the essay We and You, the paradigm Me and Other,
on the one hand, and the distinguished personality of an individual, on the other, create the
conflict between the person and the mass (the crowd) which excludes the dialogue between
the two parties. Both essays clearly distinguish the strongest personal characteristic features
of Jibran Khalil Jibran and represent him as a selfless swimmer, swimming against the current.
22
Jibran Khalil Jibran, The Prophet, Publishing House The Georgia Academic Book , Tbilisi,
2013, Translation and Preface by Nino Dolidze. P.4-5.
23
Murman Qutelia, The Arabic Romanticism, Publishing House Mtsignobari, Tbilisi, 2009. P.42.
24
228
avtorebi:
lela aleqsiZe ivane javaxiSvilis saxelobis Tbilisis saxelmwifo

universitetis profesori
valerian ramiSvili ivane javaxiSvilis saxelobis Tbilisis
saxelmwifo universitetis profesori
demur jalaRonia ivane javaxiSvilis saxelobis Tbilisis saxelmwifo
universitetis profesori
irakli braWuli ivane javaxiSvilis saxelobis Tbilisis saxelmwifo
universitetis asocirebuli profesori
anastasia zaqariaZe ivane javaxiSvilis saxelobis Tbilisis saxelmwifo
mamuka doliZe ivane javaxiSvilis saxelobis Tbilisis saxelmwifo
darejan gardavaZe ivane javaxiSvilis saxelobis Tbilisis saxelmwifo
griver farulava Tbilisis sasuliero akademiis profesori
bart s.hopkinsi sietlis universitetis profesori, aSS
joi pilota niu-jersis universitetis profesori, aSS
vitis valatka vilniusis romeris universitetis profesori, litva
arqimandriti adami (axalaZe) saqarTvelos sapatriarqos wmida Tamar
mefis saxelobis saswavlo universitetis reqtori, profesori
mama aleqsi (qSutaSvili) Tbilisis sasuliero akademiis maswav-
lebeli
qeTevan cxvariaSvili ivane javaxiSvilis saxelobis Tbilisis sa-
xelmwifo universitetis doqtoranti
vaJa niblaZe ivane javaxiSvilis saxelobis Tbilisis saxelmwifo
universitetis doqtoranti
229
Authors:
Lela Alexidze Dr. habil professor of Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University
Valerian Ramishvili Dr. habil professor of Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University
Demur Jalaghonia Dr. professor of Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University
Irakli Brachuli Dr.habil asssociated professor of Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State
University
Anastasia Zakariadze Dr.habil asssociated professor of Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State
University
Darejan Gardavadze asssociated professor of Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State
University
University
Mamuka Dolidze Dr.habil asssociated professor of Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State
University
Griver Parulava Tbilisi Spiritual Academy. professor
Burt C. Hopkins professor of Seattle University(USA)
Archimandrite Adam (Akhaladze) professor, rector of st. Tamar University
Father Alexi (Kshutashvili) Tbilisi Spiritual Academy.
Joe Pilotta professor of New-Jersey University (USA)
Vytis Valatka Mykolas Romeris University, Head of Department of Philosophy,
professor
Vazha Nibladze Doctoral student of Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University
Ketevan Tskvariashvili Doctoral student of Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University
230
gamomcemlobis redaqtorebi: marine varamaSvili
nana kaWabava
mxatvari mariam ebraliZe
koreqtori rusudan miqenaia
damkabadonebeli naTia dvali
TSU Press Editors: Marine Varamashvili

Nana Katchabava
Cover Designer Mariam Ebralidze
Proofreader Rusudan Miqenaia
Compositor Natia Dvali

0179 Tbilisi, i. WavWavaZis gamziri 14
14 Ilia Tchavtchavadze Avenue, Tbilisi 0179
Tel 995 (32) 225 14 32
www.press.tsu.edu.ge

ფილოსოფიურ-თეოლოგიური მიმომხილველი 2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ფილოსოფიურ-თეოლოგიური მიმომხილველი 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

filosofiur-Teologiuri

saredaqcio sabWo: Editorial Board:

nikolai dura (rumineTi) Nicolae Dura (Romania)

samecniero sabWo: Scientific Board:

rismag gordeziani Rismag Gordeziani

Tsu gamomcemloba, 2013

antikuri filosofiuri memkvidreoba da religia

mama aleqsi (qSutaSvili)

Teologiur-filosofiuri variaciebi Tanamedroveobaze

arqimandriti adami (axalaZe)

jibran xalil jibrani

kosmosi rogorc Teatraluri scena

plotini III 2 eneadaSi (is rigiT 47-ea da misi saxelwodebaa gangebis

Teatri, Tumca ki aris plotinTan materialuri kosmosis simbolo-gansaxi-

universumSi arsebuli simpaTiiT, romlis erT nawils adamianic warmoad-

plotinis Tanaxmad, mxolod adamians cxovelsac ki ara, aqvs Tavisu-

la, adamianebi ki maT asruleben. es hgavs Teatrs, sadac rolebs dramaturgi

magram plotini ar iqneboda plotini, antikuri epoqis filosofosi

plotinTan Teatrze, piesaze, dramasa da msaxiobze, rogorc realuri

da kidev erTi saintereso gansxvaveba: plotinisTvis arc cxovreba da

1. Plotini Opera I, ed. P. Henry et E.-R. Schwyzer, Paris, Bruxelles 1951

Cosmos as a Theatre Stage in Plotinus Philosophy

The First Age of Philosophy in Lithuania:

Similar to the position of Francisco Suarez, it would rather be regarded

The problem of universals in classic and second scholasticism

The ontological level of universals theory. Is universal given in the multitude

Does universal exist ante res?

So universal exists in individual things as the whole of their essential attributes.

Is universal a concept of human intellect?

How does universal exist in rebus? Specific and formal unity

How does universal exist in rebus? Objective being within intellect

Digression from moderate realism

Epistemological and logical levels of universals theory

The authors of Philosophy in Lithuania in the 16th Century M. miglecki, P. Viana

1. Darowski, R. 1994. Filozofia w kolegiach jezuickich w Polsce w XVI wieku. Krakw:

filosofiis pirveli saukune litvaSi:

statiaSi gaanalizebulia universaliebis Teoria, romelsac XVI sau-

statiaSi detaluradaa gaanalizebuli XVI saukunis litveli RvTis-

aToneli mamebi, ioane petriwi da gelaTuri azrovnebis

`Tu gsurT saerTod ar davcildeT keTils,

warmodgenili statiis saTauri rodesac gaviazreT, Secvla gadav-

nuli cnobierebis gamoRviZebis da kulturul-politikuri saqmianobiT

umaduroba, angareba. aseve sainteresodaa ganxiluli pirovnebis Tavisuf-

kapadokiuri kulturis aRorZineba X XI saukuneebSi qarTuli azrov-

dnen e.w. `Tavisufali~ gamokrebiT Targmnis meTods. saTargmn masalas sa-

akademiaSi Caeyara safuZveli antikuri filosofiisa da neoplatonizmis

1. sruliad saqarTvelos kaTolikos-patriarqi ilia II, epistoleni,

Athonian Fathers, Ioane Petritsi and the Establishment of Principles of

Prolegomenon to a Critique of Symbolic Reason

Critique and Historical Origin

The Critical Difference between Mathematical and Philosophical Cognition

Incommensurability of Ancient and Modern Modes of Thinking

Klein establishes the possibility of such a conceptual incommensurability in terms of

Critique of the Ancient Mode of Mathematical and

Kleins Account of Early Modern Mathematical and

Critique of Symbolic Reason

simboluri gonebis kritikis prologomenebi

iakob kleini naSromSi `berZnuli matematikuri azrovneba da algebris

straqciis aRricxva iziarebs am mosazrebas. maTi interesis sagania, Tu ra

berZnebidan dawyebuli dRemde. marTlac, i. kleinisaTvis es filosofiuri

Tematika. am SemTxvevaSi maT saerTo sagani aqvT, magram gonebiT gamokvle-

pir gagebadia gonebis konceptis meSveobiT, im konceptisagan gansxvavebiT.

obieqtis Semecnebis manerisa, romelic moqmedebs antikuri berZnebis da ad-

tis warmoSobas. kleini `abstraqcias~ acxadebs pasuxismgeblad `simbolu-