Can Habakkuk be called a fanatic of the faith? “Fortitude of conviction, greatness of spirit

Topic: “The Life of Habakkuk, written by himself.”

The personality of Archpriest Avvakum, tenacity of convictions, greatness of spirit.

Target lesson: see Avvakum as a special, extraordinary linguistic personality, note the traditional and innovative features of his life.

Tasks lesson: 1) Acquaintance with the text of the Old Russian period of language development

2) Introduce the historical and cultural situation of the time discussed in the life

3) Instill linguistic and cultural skills comprehensive analysis text (lexical, historical, cultural level)

4) Form a sense of patriotism.

Vocabulary work:
National character, family life, fortitude, fanaticism, personality, innovation.

Epigraph on the board:

There is God, there is peace, they live forever,
But people's lives are momentary and miserable.
But a person contains everything within himself,
Who loves life and believes in God. (N. Gumilyov)

(The class must first be divided into three creative groups: literary scholars, historians, textual critics, and give them a task to study historical situation the times of Archpriest Avvakum, the memories of his contemporaries, the text of the “Life” and prepare materials for discussion.)

DURING THE CLASSES:
Teacher: Guys, read the epigraph to our lesson. (The student reads expressively)

How do you understand the meaning of these words? Our conversation will be about a man who loved life and believed in God - about Archpriest Avvakum, a bright and extraordinary personality. . introduction teachers:
The Russian Church sought legal and ideological autonomy from the Byzantine Church, so it was extremely important to achieve the canonization of its own, Russian saints, an indispensable condition for which was the presence of a life.

What is life?

Write the definition in your notebooks.
Life is a story about the life, suffering or pious deeds of people canonized by the church, that is, recognized as saints and officially honored. Hagiographic literature is called hagiography (FROM GREEK AGIOS-HOLY, GRAPHOS-WRITE)

And now we will be transported to the 17th century (sacred music

"Oh All-Singing Mother"
The student, prepared, comes out with a candle, a pen and paper in his hands, sits down at the table, begins to write, while speaking out loud the text from the “Life”:

“Therefore, I ask the forgiveness of every true believer: it was otherwise, it seems, I don’t even need to talk about my life... But I am nothing. Rekoh, and again the river: I am a sinner, a fornicator and a predator, a thief and a murderer, a friend of tax collectors and sinners, and a accursed hypocrite to every man. Forgive and pray for me, but I owe it to you, who honor and listen. I don’t know how to live anymore; and what I do, I tell people; let them pray to God for me!”

Teacher. This is how the 17th century writer Archpriest Avvakum Petrov addressed his readers. Which language features, characteristic of the genre of hagiography already known to you, did you notice in this appeal? (Method of self-deprecation, branding)

For what? (He does not put himself above his reader, this is a kind of attempt to win over him, humiliating himself like this - a sinner, a friend of tax collectors and sinners and every person.

He asks for forgiveness. Forgiveness in Orthodoxy is a kind of amulet against pride)

Avvakum's life story is tragic. In spirit and temperament he was a fighter, polemicist, and denouncer. Speaking against the reforms of Patriarch Nikon, he suffered a lot for his faith. At the end of his difficult life in Pustozersk, a small town at the mouth of the Pechora, he wrote his “Life”
-To whom did Habakkuk address his writing? How did he imagine his reader? How can we explain the deep emotionality of his narrative?
-What is the difference between the “Life” of Habakkuk and traditional works this genre? In what ways is it close to hagiographic canons?
-How did Russian writers evaluate the personality of Archpriest Avvakum? Literary scholars, historians, and textual critics will help us understand this.
Student performance:
LITERARY CHIEF: Avvakum (archpriest) – champion of the old faith, leader of the Old Believers, author famous life and a number of other works. Born on Nizhny Novgorod land, in the village of Grigoriev, in the family of the village priest Peter, at the age of 21 he was made a deacon of the church in the village. Lopatitsy, a year later he was ordained a priest, and 8 years later he was appointed archpriest of the Ascension Church in the city of Yuryevets Povolsky.
HISTORIANS: Avvakum’s elevation to archpriest took place in 1652, on the eve of Nikon’s church reform. At this time, Avvakum was closely associated with the circle of zealots of piety, which was headed by the archpriest of the Kremlin Annunciation Cathedral, Stefan Bonifatiev, with the archpriest of the Moscow Kazan Cathedral, Ivan Neronov. The members of the circle included the young Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich. They sought to elevate the spirit of church life Russian state, advocated for the revival of the active pastoral activity of the clergy, fought against common types of entertainment, seeing in it remnants of paganism.
TEXTOLOGISTS: From archival documents it is known that Avvakum moved to Moscow from Yuryevets in 1652 to his spiritual father Ivan Neronov (in Yuryevets he had a conflict with the parishioners who rebelled against the shepherd, who was unyielding in his piety). In Moscow, Avvakum was introduced to the Tsar by Stefan Vanifatiev himself. He served in one of the chapels of the Kazan Cathedral and became permanent participant a circle of God-lovers, which included the Tsar’s favorite, Metropolitan Nikon of Novgorod, the future patriarch.
LITERARY SCHOLARISTS: Avvakum was already so influential among the members of the circle close to the tsar that, together with other participants, he signed a petition to the tsar about the future patriarch; the person they were fighting for was Nikon.
HISTORIANS: Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich also wanted to see Nikon as a patriarch; in 1652 Nikon became patriarch, and from Lent in 1653 he began to implement the church reform that led to a schism in the church that has not been overcome to this day.
TEXTOLOGISTS: The Patriarch sent a “memory” (order) to the Kazan Cathedral to replace the two-fingered sign of the cross with a three-fingered one and to reduce prostrations when reading the prayer of repentance. At the printing house, by order of the patriarch, the texts of liturgical books began to be edited, bringing them into line with modern Greek ones. All this caused active rejection on the part of a huge part of the people and the clergy.
HISTORIANS: Among the people who protested was Habakkuk. The authorities responded to the rejection of Nikon's reforms with repression. Avvakum was arrested in 1653, and in September, by order of Nikon and the Tsar, he was exiled to Siberia, where he participated in the expedition of the governor Afanasy Pashkov, who made a multi-year journey from Yeniseisk to Nerchinsk, through unconquered Siberia, experiencing cruel oppression by the governor; His family wandered with him.
LITERARY SCIENTISTS "In the early 60s, the king called Avvakum from Siberia. Avvakum again began to fearlessly convince the tsar to abandon innovations and speak out in defense of the old faith, for which he was again exiled by order of the tsar to Pustozersky Ostrog, near Pechora.
HISTORIANS: In February 1666, Avvakum was brought to Moscow for the trial of a church council, convened on the initiative of the tsar to condemn the Old Believers, resolve the case of the disgraced Nikon and elect a new patriarch in his place. Nikon was condemned and exiled, the new Patriarch Joseph 2 was cut off (those who belonged to the clergy) and, having subjected many, as heretics, to cutting of their tongues, they were sent to prison. At the end of 1667, Avvakum, together with four of his allies, the Siberian priest Nikifor, St. Lazarus, Deacon Fyodor, and monk Epiphanius, was exiled to Pustozersk, put in an earthen pit and languished in it until 1682. Avvakum, along with three allies, was executed on April 14, 1682 by burning in a log house.
TEACHER: I think, plunging into historical era 17th century, you can imagine the autobiography of a hero in which everything is subordinated to the defense of the old faith as a national form of consciousness. Habakkuk saw the reform as an encroachment on national life, therefore, he lovingly depicts everyday details and speaks a rich, bright “mean” language. This text has journalistic pathos.
Now let’s work with the text of the “Life”, on the tables there are cards with tasks and questions for analysis.
II. GROUP WORK
The first group analyzes the composition and plot:
1.What is unique about the composition of the text?
2.What is the basis of the plot?
3. In what sequence are the events depicted?
4.Who main character? What can you say about the other heroes of the work?
The second group analyzes the features of the image of the hero, his character:
1. How are the author and the hero related in the text?
2.What is Habakkuk’s life feat? What is he for and against?
3.What are the techniques for depicting and creating an image?
4.What is your opinion about the personality of Habakkuk?
The third group analyzes the features of the style and language of the work:
1.What is unique about the language of the work? What style of speech is typical for vernacular?
2. How can you explain the emotionality of the presentation?
3.What is the imaginary addressee of Habakkuk’s speech? Who is his appeal intended for?
4. What artistic tropes does the author use? How does the hero's speech characterize him?
Individual task :
Reading Avvakum's message to the boyar Morozova: what does it reveal to us in the personality of the archpriest? (Use V. Surikov’s painting “Boyaryna Morozova.”)
III. Discussion of the results of work on the cards
(work with notebooks)

TEACHER: The left side of the table is filled in advance on the board, and the right side is filled in as a result of the students' answers, these are the results of your work on the cards.

Now let’s listen to the student’s message based on V. Surikov’s painting “Boyaryna Morozova”.
DISCIPLE: Boyarina Morozova is the spiritual daughter of Avvakum. The strength of her protest and commitment shocks the viewer. In the painting, Surikov preserved the features of Russian life of the 16th and 17th centuries: ancient customs, clothes. The stern face of the noblewoman seems to be illuminated by fire. V.I. Surikov joked, saying: “If I wrote hell, then I myself would sit in the fire and force people to pose in the fire.” The story of the noblewoman and her captives Evdokia Ursova and Maria Danilova, “faithful little unfortunates” as Avvakum called them, is so plausibly conveyed.
Reads out an excerpt from Avvakum’s message to boyar Morozova...

I will not be lazy and remember your exploits and labors, blessed Theodosia. The self-witness is your external and internal fruit. Like Tsar Fedosius, the ruler of goods, he wore the royal purple and scarlet; inside, a hair shirt under the royal robe, riding him in the royal chariot. And at that time you wrote books with your own hands, and gave the labors of your hands to the poor, and gave yourself the food you needed from the handicrafts of your system; He loved the poor and the poor dearly, and was diligent in his rule and fasting; and kneeling and doing other things that are appropriate for humility. So, too, your labors were fasting and praying urgently, and you wore a hair shirt under your robe on the asshole, made from white haired cattle, short-sleeved. And you were once saddened by what your daughter-in-law, Boris’s wife, Anna Ilyichna Morozova, knew about you. I thought about how it was not done by will. God will forgive, but you, according to the rule and reading the book, reasoning with the household and the Christian village needs, without rest for days until the ninth hour and more, worrying about Christian correction, punishing some with the rod, and drawing others with the love and mercy of the Lord.
From this passage we understand that Habakkuk feels like a shepherd, a mentor of “Christ’s flock.” This is his mission. The text is very emotional: from abusive language to tender gratitude. Upholding the truth is the main thing for Avvakum.
TEACHER: Now, guys, we have come to the point where we need to draw conclusions about the writing activity and innovation of Archpriest Avvakum.

CONCLUSIONS:
LITERATORS: Writing is inseparable from his preaching activity; everything that Avvakum wrote, from the “Life” to the message to the flock, is imbued with the pathos of defending the old faith.

HISTORIANS: In the history of Russian literature, “Life” occupies a special place. Being a traditionalist in the field of church life, Avvakum acted as an innovator as a writer.

TEXTOLOGISTS: The style and poetics of his “Life” stand out sharply against the background of the style and literary principles, which had dominated literature until then. Innovation was embodied in a pronounced orientation towards vernacular language; he emphasizes that he writes like a simpleton consciously (I love my Russian natural language, I am not in the habit of coloring my speech with philosophical verses)

LITERATORS: An even greater innovation was that he decided to create his own life and created a brilliant work of the autobiographical genre.

HISTORIANS: These features: individuality of form and content literary work. No wonder outstanding writers His writings were highly valued from Dostoevsky and Leskov to Mamin - Sibiryak and Gorky.

TEXTOLOGISTS: In addition to his life, Avvakum is the author of the “Book of Conversations” and the “Book of Interpretations”, several petitions to the Tsar, letters and messages to the family of the noblewoman Morozova.
Lesson summary

So, we end the lesson with the fact that what is striking about Habakkuk is his fearlessness, selflessness, fanaticism of faith, and perseverance. His personality reflects some features of the Russian national character: eternal truth-seeking and selfless devotion to faith. Avvakum first spoke out against the cult of the royal personality, so his religious idea acquired a social character. The idea of ​​freedom is modern and relevant.

• Results of observation of a literary text

• 8th grade students

• [email protected]

Analysis of composition and plot

• What is unique about the composition of the text?

• What is the basis of the plot?

• In what order are the events depicted?

• What is the form of the story?

• Who is the main character? What can you say about the other characters in the work?

Features of the hero's image

• How are the author and the hero related in the text?

• What is the duality of the hero's image?

• What is Habakkuk’s life feat? What is he for and against?

• How is the character's character revealed?

• What are the basic techniques for creating an image?

• What is your opinion about the personality of Habakkuk?

Features of style and language

• What is unique about the language of the work? What style of speech is typical for vernacular?

• How can you explain the emotionality of the presentation?

• What is the imaginary addressee of Habakkuk's speech? Who is his appeal intended for?

• Which episodes have a comic touch? Why does she appear in life?

• What artistic techniques (tropes) does the author use?

• How is the hero characterized by his speech?

Canonical features of life

• Canonical features of life

• The life is the biography of a saint.

• The life was compiled after the death of the saint.

• The narration is told in third person, characterized by leisurely presentation and calm intonation.

• The composition of the life is built according to a strict scheme.

• The way to portray a hero is idealization.

• The hero's inner world is not depicted in development; he is chosen from the moment of birth.

• Space and time are depicted conventionally.

, in particular, chance.

• In the depiction of the saint, whenever possible, all individual character traits, in particular, accidents, were eliminated.

• The tone of the story is solemn and serious.

• The language of life is bookish, with an abundance of Church Slavonicisms.

The text is designed for a literate, prepared person.

• The text is designed for a literate, prepared person.

• The plot of the life is the spiritual feat of the saint.

conclusions

Avvakum acts as an innovator, destroying the medieval canon. Before us is an unusual work, which reflects the real contradictions of the era and the contradictions in the character and worldview of the hero, the painting public life and the life of Rus' in the mid-17th century, heroic and ordinary, tragic and comic. All this goes beyond not only hagiography, but also other well-known genres of that time, forcing the reader to think about the question:

Why, despite the ideological motives of the author that are alien to us, did this monument go far beyond the boundaries of the environment for which it was intended, and why does it continue to interest and excite readers of our time?

Think

“The Life merged into a single whole the epic, lyrical and dramatic principles, elements of many genres of ancient Russian writing - educational literature, sermons, lives, teachings, everyday stories, as well as oral folk tale. It is therefore hardly possible to define the genre of the Life by any term known to us. But at the same time, from everything we have said, we can draw a conclusion about the manifestation in the Life of a certain trend in the history of Russian literature, about the approach of the Life to a certain genre, which finally took shape somewhat later. We mean the tendency towards the formation of a synthetic genre of the novel.”

• V.E. Gusev

Used materials

• Old Russian literature. Reading book for grades 5-9 / Compiled by E. Rogachevskaya. – M.: SCHOLA-PRESS, 1993.

• Avvakum Petrovich - biography of the archpriest

  Avvakum Petrov or Avvakum Petrovich (born November 25 (December 5), 1620, - death April 14 (24), 1682) - a prominent Russian ecclesiastical and public figure XVII century, priest, archpriest.

  Archpriest Avvakum is one of the most bright personalities in the history of Russia. He was a man enormous power spirit, which fully manifested itself during the times of persecution against him. From childhood he was accustomed to asceticism. He considered aversion from everything worldly and the desire for holiness to be so natural for a person that he could not get along in any parish because of his tireless pursuit of worldly pleasures and deviations from the customs of faith. Many revered him as a saint and miracle worker.

  An important fact of Russian history XVII century there was a church schism that emerged as a result of the church reform of Patriarch Nikon. The reform was supposed to eliminate discrepancies in church books oh and the difference in the conduct of rituals that undermined the authority of the church. Everyone agreed with the need for reform: both Nikon and his future opponent Archpriest Avvakum. It was just unclear what to take as a basis - translations into Old Slavonic language Byzantine liturgical books written before the fall of Constantinople in 1453, or the Greek texts themselves, including those that were corrected after the fall of Constantinople.

  
  

  By Nikon's decree, Greek books were taken as samples, and discrepancies with the ancient ones appeared in the new translations. This served as the formal basis for the split. The more significant innovations adopted by Patriarch Nikon and the church council of 1654 were the replacement of baptism with two fingers with three fingers, pronouncing the praise to God “Hallelujah” not twice, but three times, moving around the lectern in the church not in the direction of the Sun, but against it.

  All of them were related to the purely ritual side, and did not concern the essence of Orthodoxy. But under the slogan of a return to the old faith, people united who did not want to come to terms with the growth of state and landowner exploitation, with the increasing role of foreigners, with everything that seemed to them inconsistent with the traditional ideal of “truth.” The schism began when Patriarch Nikon banned double-fingering in all Moscow churches. In addition, he invited learned monks from Kyiv to “correct” church books. Epiphany Stavinetsky, Arseny Satanovsky and Damaskin Ptitsky arrived in Moscow, and immediately took over the monastery libraries. Everything familiar collapsed at once - not only the church, but also society found itself in a deep and tragic split.

  It was primarily the “God-lovers,” or “zealots of piety,” who took up arms against Nikon, led by Stefan Vonifatiev. In addition, the rector of the Kazan Church on Red Square, Ivan Neronov, the archpriests - Daniil of Kostroma, Loggin of Murom, Daniil of Temnikov, and Avvakum of Yuryev - stood out with great activity. Nikon was also a member of this circle, which is why the “zealots” supported his election to patriarch.

  “Lovers of God” believed that it was necessary to restore order in the church, to eradicate the indifferent attitude of the laity towards church services and rituals, introduce sermons. In their opinion, the correction of liturgical books should have been carried out not according to Greek, but according to ancient Russian manuscripts. They were very wary of everything foreign and were hostile to the penetration of elements Western culture in Russia.

  Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich partly agreed with them, although he had a different idea of ​​the essence of church reforms.

  The very first actions of the new patriarch convinced the “zealots” that they were deeply mistaken regarding Nikon’s Old Belief. The abolition of double-fingers instantly caused widespread indignation. They began to talk about Nikon as a “Latinist,” the forerunner of the Antichrist.

  Nikon prudently and quickly removed the restless zealots from his path. Stefan Vonifatiev was the first to fall into disgrace. He was tonsured a monk, and soon died in the Nikon Iveron Monastery. Following him, Neronov was convicted, who was charged with insulting the personality of the patriarch. He ended his life as an archimandrite of the monastery in Pereyaslavl-Zalessky.

  Of all the schism teachers, the fate of Archpriest Avvakum turned out to be the most severe. Back in September 1653, he was sent into exile to Tobolsk, from where, 3 years later, he was transferred to Eastern Siberia.

  Avvakum vividly and figuratively narrates in his “Life” about his many years of stay in Dauria, about the torment that befell his family. Here is just one episode from this book:

  “The country is barbaric, the foreigners are not peaceful, we don’t dare leave behind the horses, and we can’t keep up with the horses, we are hungry and languid people. At another time, the poor archpriest wandered and wandered, and then fell down and could not get up. And the other languid one immediately fell down: both were climbing, but could not get up. Then the poor woman blames me: “How long, archpriest, will this torment last?” And I told her: “Markovna, until death.” She’s against it: “Okay, Petrovich, we’ll still wander in the future.”

  At the beginning of 1661, Alexei Mikhailovich allowed Avvakum to return to Moscow. Avvakum perked up, considering that the sovereign had turned his back on the Nikonians and would now obey the Old Believers in everything. In fact, the situation was much more complicated.

  As one would expect, the power-hungry Nikon did not want to be satisfied with a second role in the state. Based on the principle of “priesthood above the kingdom,” he tried to completely break out of subordination to secular power and assert his supreme dominance not only over church people, but also over the laity. Extremely concerned about this turn of events, the boyars and higher clergy began to increasingly oppose church reforms, despite the fact that Alexei Mikhailovich directly advocated their implementation.

  Gradually, a cooling was brewing between the king and the patriarch. Nikon, who delved little into the essence of behind-the-scenes intrigues, could not even think about changing the sovereign’s attitude towards himself. On the contrary, he was confident in the inviolability of his position. When Alexei Mikhailovich expressed displeasure with the patriarch’s domineering actions, Nikon, on July 11, 1658, after a service in the Assumption Cathedral, told the people that he was leaving his patriarchal throne and retired to the Resurrection Monastery. By this he hoped to finally break the weak-willed tsar, but did not take into account the growing influence of the Old Believer boyars on him.

  Noticing his mistake, Nikon tried to go back, but this further complicated the matter. Given the established dependence of the Russian Church on secular power, the way out of this situation depended entirely on the will of the Tsar, but Alexei Mikhailovich hesitated and, not wanting to give in to the claims of his recent “sobrine friend,” at the same time for a long time could not muster the courage to inflict the last hit. But his new entourage managed to arrange the return of Archpriest Avvakum and other members of the former circle of “God-lovers” to Moscow. Knowing nothing about these circumstances in Dauria, Avvakum connected his challenge with the victory of the Old Belief.

  

  Avvakum's journey through Siberia

  For almost two years he traveled to Moscow, tirelessly preaching his teaching along the way. Imagine his disappointment when he saw that Nikonianism had taken root everywhere in church life, and Alexei Mikhailovich, having lost interest in Nikon, nevertheless had no intention of abandoning his reforms. A passionate readiness to fight for his convictions awakened in him with the same force, and he, taking advantage of the sovereign’s favor, submitted a lengthy petition to him.

  “I hoped,” wrote Avvakum, “while surviving in the east through the deaths of many, there would be silence here in Moscow, but now I saw the church more and more confused than before.” He bombarded the Tsar with petitions protesting against Nikonianism, and the Patriarch himself, Alexei Mikhailovich, wanted to win over the intrepid “zealot of piety” to his side, as this would make it possible to completely drown out the increasingly growing popular opposition.

  That is why, without directly expressing his attitude towards Avvakum’s petitions, he tried to persuade him to yield by promising first the position of the tsar’s confessor, then, which attracted Avvakum much more, the inquiry officer and the Printing House. At the same time, on behalf of the tsar, boyar Rodion Streshnev persuaded the archpriest to stop his sermons against the official church , at least until the council, which will discuss the issue of Nikon.

  Touched by the attention of the sovereign and hoping that he would be entrusted with correcting the books, Habakkuk actually remained at peace for some time. This turn of events did not please the Old Believers, and they rushed from all sides to persuade the archpriest not to abandon the “fatherly traditions.” Habakkuk resumed his denunciations of the Nikonian clergy, calling them in his sermons and writings renegades and Uniates. “They,” he asserted, “are not children of the church, but of the devil.” The Emperor saw how groundless his hopes were for the reconciliation of Avvakum with the church and, succumbing to the persuasion of the clergy, on August 29, 1664, he signed a decree deporting Avvakum to the Pustozersky prison.

  1666, February - in connection with the opening of a church council, Avvakum was brought to Moscow. They again tried to persuade him to accept the church reforms, but the archpriest “did not bring repentance and obedience, but persisted in everything, and also reproached the consecrated council and called it unorthodox.” As a result, on May 13, Habakkuk was stripped of his hair and cursed as a heretic.

  After the trial, Avvakum, along with other schism teachers, was sent to prison in the Ugreshsky Monastery, from where he was later transferred to Pafnutyev-Borovsky. In a special instruction sent to the abbot of that monastery, it was ordered that Avvakum should be “tightly guarded with great fear, so that he does not leave prison and does no harm to himself, and do not give him ink and paper, and do not order anyone to come to him.”

  They still hoped to break him with the help of the ecumenical patriarchs, who were expected at the council to depose Nikon.

  The patriarchs arrived in Moscow in April 1667.

  Because everything had already been decided with Nikon and he was deposed from the patriarchate on December 12, 1666, they had no choice but to thoroughly deal with Avvakum. The archpriest was delivered to them on July 17. They persuaded him for a long time, advising him to humble himself and accept church innovations.

  “Why are you so stubborn? - said the patriarchs. “All of our Palestine, and Serbia, and Albania, and the Volokhs, and the Romans, and the Poles - all cross themselves with three fingers, you alone persist in dual faith.”

  “Universal teachers! Rome fell long ago and lies unyielding, and the Poles perished with it, until the end they were enemies of Christians. And your Orthodoxy has become motley due to the violence of the Turk Makhmet - and one cannot be surprised at you: you have naturally become weak. And in the future, come to us as teachers: we, by God’s grace, have autocracy. Before Nikon the apostate in our Russia, among the pious princes and kings, Orthodoxy was pure and immaculate and the church was undisturbed.”

  After that, Avvakum went to the door and lay down on the floor with the words: “You sit, and I’ll lie down.”

  He no longer listened to ridicule or admonitions. 1667, August - Avvakum was taken to Pustozersk. His family and many other Old Believers languished there. During the Pustozersky period, Avvakum fully developed his schism. He spoke for the past, without at all thinking of neglecting the present: just his vision modern reality contradicted the prevailing trends of the era. Muscovite Rus' was rebuilt on different spiritual principles, bringing its cultural and ideological orientations in every possible way closer to the general Christian and Western European traditions.

  The ideology of Avvakum bore the imprint of the views of that part of the Russian peasantry, which, under the influence of increasing serfdom, essentially turned into complete serfs and slaves. They advocated the preservation of their previous privileges, rejected all church reforms, spontaneously recognizing their connection with the new political system. Peasants left their homes in droves and went into the deep forests of the North and Trans-Urals, fearing neither government persecution nor the anathemas of spiritual shepherds.

  The number of mass self-immolations increased every year. Hundreds and thousands of people often died in fire. For example, at the beginning of 1687, more than 2000 people were burned in the Paleostrovsky monastery. On August 9 of the same year in Berezovo, Olonetsky district - more than 1000. And there were many similar facts.

  

  Burning of Archpriest Avvakum

  Avvakum knew well about all this and in every possible way encouraged the Old Believers to self-immolate. In his “Epistle to a certain Sergius,” he wrote: “Most of all, at the present time in our Russia, they themselves go into the fire out of great sorrow, zealous for piety, like the apostles of old: they do not spare themselves, but for the sake of Christ and the Mother of God they go into death.” In the same message, Avvakum spoke about one of these mass self-immolations: “Brother, brother, it’s a dear thing that they will put you in the fire: do you remember in the Nizhny Novgorod region, where I lived when I was born, two thousand and two, and the little ones themselves ran into the fire from those crafty spirits “They did it wisely, they found warmth for themselves, and with this they escaped the temptation of the local temptation.”

  The archpriest advised Sergius: “What are you thinking? Don’t think, don’t think too much, go into the fire, God will bless you. Those who ran into the fire did good... Eternal memory to them.” In the years 1675–1695 alone, 37 “burnings” (that is, self-immolations) were recorded, during which at least 20,000 people died.

  Thus, Avvakum became the first and almost the only preacher of mass suicide in world religious teachings. And therefore, paying tribute to him as a brilliant preacher; speaker and writer, we find it natural that he ultimately shared the fate of all heresiarchs.
  Meanwhile, Emperor Alexei Mikhailovich died in God, and his son Fedor ascended the throne. It seemed to Habakkuk that they had simply forgotten about him. He was getting old, and it was becoming unbearable to withstand the melancholy and loneliness in the wilderness. And he took a step towards his death. 1681 - Avvakum sent a message to Tsar Fedor, in which he fanatically and recklessly poured out everything he had accumulated over the past long years irritation against the church and clergy.

  “And what, Tsar-Sovereign,” he wrote, “if you gave me freedom, I would, like Elijah the prophet, overthrow them all in one day. I would not defile my hands, but I would also sanctify them with tea.”

  Perhaps the tsar would not have attached importance to this letter if the monk had not mentioned below about his late father: “God judges between me and Tsar Alexei. He sits in agony, I heard from the Savior; then to him for his truth. The foreigners, who knew what they were told to do, did it. They betrayed their Tsar Constantine to the Turks, having lost faith, and they supported my Alexei in his madness.”

  Tsar Fedor did not have any sympathy for the Old Believers and perceived Avvakum’s message as a threat to the existing government, and to himself personally. There was no one to bother for Avvakum: not a single one of his former well-wishers remained at the Moscow court; they were supplanted by the “Kyiv non-hai” - learned monks led by Simeon of Polotsk. And Habakkuk "for the great royal house blasphemy" was ordered to be burned along with his three co-religionists.

  1682, April 14 - the life of this man ended at the stake fearless man, which remains an unsolved legend ancient Russian spirituality. Very scant details of this execution have reached us. It is known that it took place in front of a large crowd of people. The prisoners were led out from behind the prison fence to the place of execution. Habakkuk disposed of his property in advance, distributed books, and clean white shirts were found for the hour of death. And all the same, the sight was painful—festering eyes, chopped off, shrunken hands. Now no one persuaded Avvakum, Fedor, Lazar and Epiphanius to renounce.

  The executioners tied the convicts to the four corners of the log house, covered them with firewood and birch bark and set them on fire.

  People took off their hats...

  Part 1
  LESSON DISCUSSION
  Topic: “The Life of Habakkuk, written by himself”
  The personality of Archpriest Avvakum, tenacity of convictions, greatness of spirit.

  The power and beauty of the language of the works of Archpriest Avvakum.

  
  Target:

  Introduce students to the world written culture Ancient Rus'

  Prepare the perception of all subsequent literature;

  Introduce the moral and didactic works of ancient Russian scribes

  Develop the ability to analyze historical and literary “hagiographical” descriptions

  Cultivate fearlessness, dedication, and perseverance.

  
  Knowledge in the lesson:
  Vocabulary work:

  National character, family life, fortitude, fanaticism, personality, innovation.

  (Preliminarily, the class must be divided into three creative groups: literary critics, historians, textual critics, and given the task of studying the historical situation of the times of Archpriest Avvakum, the memories of his contemporaries about him, the text of the “Life” and prepare materials for discussion.)
  Equipment:

  There is God, there is peace, they live forever,

  But people's lives are momentary and miserable.

  But a person contains everything within himself,

  Who loves life and believes in God. (N. Gumilyov)

  DURING THE CLASSES:
  1. Teacher's opening remarks:

  Communicating the goals and objectives of the lesson, reading the epigraph

  The Russian Church sought legal and ideological autonomy from the Byzantine Church, so it was extremely important to achieve the canonization of its own, Russian saints, an indispensable condition for which was the presence of a life. Write the definition in your notebooks.

  A life is a story about the life, suffering or pious deeds of people canonized by the church, that is, recognized as saints and officially honored. Hagiographic literature is called hagiography (FROM GREEK AGIOS-HOLY, GRAPHOS-WRITE)

  Literary and aesthetic reasons also played a significant role: acquaintance with translated Byzantine Lives could also awaken among Russian scribes a desire to try their hand at this genre. Hagiographers, as a rule, also spoke about the miracles performed by saints, describing them in vivid detail.

  Already in Kievan Rus Many Byzantine hagiographies were translated. The oldest Russian life was, apparently, the “Life of Anthony of Pechersk” - a monk who was the first to settle in a cave and with his act set an example for the founding of the monastery, which later turned into the famous Kiev-monastery.

  Pechersky Monastery.

  In the second half of the 11th century, the “Life of Theodosius of Pechersk” and two versions of the lives of Boris and Gleb were created.

  Avvakum's life story is tragic. In spirit and temperament he was a fighter, polemicist, and denouncer. Speaking against the reforms of Patriarch Nikon, he suffered a lot for his faith. At the end of his difficult life in Pustozersk, a small town at the mouth of the Pechora, he wrote his “Life”

  To whom did Habakkuk address his writing? How did he imagine his reader? How can we explain the deep emotionality of his narrative?

  How does the Life of Avvakum differ from traditional works of this genre? In what ways is it close to hagiographic canons?

  How did Russian writers evaluate the personality of Archpriest Avvakum? Literary scholars, historians, and textual critics will help us understand this.

  
  Student performance:

  LITERARY SCHOLARISTS: Avvakum (archpriest) is a champion of the old faith, leader of the Old Believers, author of a famous life and a number of other works. Born on Nizhny Novgorod land, in the village of Grigoriev, in the family of the village priest Peter, at the age of 21 he was made a deacon of the village church. Lopatitsy, 2 years later he was ordained a priest, and 8 years later he was appointed archpriest of the Ascension Church in the city of Yuryevets Povolsky.

  
  HISTORIANS: Avvakum’s elevation to archpriest took place in 1652, on the eve of Nikon’s church reform. At this time, Avvakum was closely associated with the circle of zealots of piety, which was headed by the archpriest of the Kremlin Annunciation Cathedral, Stefan Bonifatiev, with the archpriest of the Moscow Kazan Cathedral, Ivan Neronov. The members of the circle included the young Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich. They sought to elevate the spirit of church life in the Russian state, advocated for the revival of the active pastoral activity of the clergy, and fought against common forms of entertainment, seeing in it remnants of paganism.
  TEXTOLOGISTS: From archival documents it is known that Avvakum moved to Moscow from Yuryevets in 1652 to his spiritual father Ivan Neronov (in Yuryevets he had a conflict with the parishioners who rebelled against the shepherd, who was unyielding in his piety). In Moscow, Avvakum was introduced to the Tsar by Stefan Vanifatiev himself. He served in one of the aisles of the Kazan Cathedral and became a permanent member of the circle of lovers of God, which included the tsar’s favorite, Metropolitan Nikon of Novgorod, the future patriarch.
  LITERARY SCHOLARISTS: Avvakum was already so influential among the members of the circle close to the tsar that, together with other participants, he signed a petition to the tsar about the future patriarch; the person they were fighting for was Nikon.
  HISTORIANS: Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich also wanted to see Nikon as a patriarch; in 1652 Nikon became patriarch, and from Lent in 1653 he began to implement the church reform that led to a schism in the church that has not been overcome to this day.
  TEXTOLOGISTS: The Patriarch sent a “memory” (order) to the Kazan Cathedral to replace the two-fingered sign of the cross with a three-fingered one and to reduce prostrations when reading the prayer of repentance. At the printing house, by order of the patriarch, the texts of liturgical books began to be edited, bringing them into line with modern Greek ones. All this caused active rejection on the part of a huge part of the people and the clergy.
  HISTORIANS: Among the people who protested was Habakkuk. The authorities responded to the rejection of Nikon's reforms with repression. Avvakum was arrested in 1653, and in September, by order of Nikon and the Tsar, he was exiled to Siberia, where he participated in the expedition of the governor Afanasy Pashkov, who made a multi-year journey from Yeniseisk to Nerchinsk, through unconquered Siberia, experiencing cruel oppression by the governor; His family wandered with him.
  LITERARY SCIENTISTS "In the early 60s, the king called Avvakum from Siberia. Avvakum again began to fearlessly convince the tsar to abandon innovations and speak out in defense of the old faith, for which he was again exiled by order of the tsar to Pustozersky Ostrog, near Pechora.

  HISTORIANS: In February 1666, Avvakum was brought to Moscow for the trial of a church council, convened on the initiative of the tsar to condemn the Old Believers, resolve the case of the disgraced Nikon and elect a new patriarch in his place. Nikon was condemned and exiled, the new Patriarch Joseph 2 was cut off (those who belonged to the clergy) and, having subjected many, as heretics, to cutting of their tongues, they were sent to prison. At the end of 1667, Avvakum, together with four of his allies, the Siberian priest Nikifor, St. Lazarus, Deacon Fyodor, and monk Epiphanius, was exiled to Pustozersk, put in an earthen pit and languished in it until 1682. Avvakum, along with three allies, was executed on April 14, 1682 by burning in a log house.

  
  TEACHER: I think, plunging into the historical era of the 17th century, you will be able to imagine the autobiography of the hero, in which everything is subordinated to the defense of the old faith as a national form of consciousness. Avvakum saw the reform as an encroachment on national life, so he lovingly depicts everyday details and speaks in a rich, bright “mean” language. This text has journalistic pathos.

  Now let’s work with the text of the “Life”, on the tables there are cards with tasks and questions for analysis.

  
  II. GROUP WORK

  The first group analyzes the composition and plot:

  1.What is unique about the composition of the text?

  2.What is the basis of the plot?

  3. In what sequence are the events depicted?

  4.Who is the main character? What can you say about the other heroes of the work?

  The second group analyzes the features of the image of the hero, his character:

  2.What is Habakkuk’s life feat? What is he for and against?

  3.What are the techniques for depicting and creating an image?

  4.What is your opinion about the personality of Habakkuk?

  The third group analyzes the features of the style and language of the work:

  1.What is unique about the language of the work? What style of speech is typical for vernacular?

  2. How can you explain the emotionality of the presentation?

  3.What is the imaginary addressee of Habakkuk’s speech? Who is his appeal intended for?

  4. What artistic tropes does the author use? How does the hero's speech characterize him?

  Individual task:

  Reading Avvakum's message to the boyar Morozova: what does it reveal to us in the personality of the archpriest? (Use V. Surikov’s painting “Boyaryna Morozova.”)

  
  III. Discussion of the results of work on the cards

  (work with notebooks)

  Canonical features of life	Artistic features of life
  1. Life is the biography of a saint	1. Habakkuk is not canonized.
  2. The Life was compiled after the death of the saint.	2.Written during his lifetime.
  3. The narration is from a third person.	3. The Life resembles a confession-sermon; the form of narration in the first person gives the text emotionality and strength.
  4. The composition of the life is built according to a strict scheme.	4. In general terms, the composition is consistent, there is no usual ending.
  5.The method of depicting the hero is idealization.	5. The hero is not an ideal person, he is a “holy sinner.”
  6. The hero’s inner world is not depicted in development; he is a chosen one from the moment of birth.	6. The hero’s inner world is clearly depicted, this is served by an internal monologue.
  7.Passion and time are depicted conventionally.	7.Specific and real.
  8. In the depiction of the saint, whenever possible, all individual character traits, in particular, accidents, were eliminated.	8. The hero is clearly individual, recognizable, his speech is original, emotional, before us is not an abstract ideal of a person, but an earthly sufferer, a rebel.
  9. The tone of the story is solemn and serious.	9.Comic notes appear.
  10. The language of life is bookish, with an abundance of Old Church Slavonicisms and church words.	10. The language is lively, colloquial, the introduction of vernaculars is the main stylistic device; It’s as if the author doesn’t write, but speaks freely.
  11.The text is designed for a literate, prepared person.	11. The author addresses the reader from the people - peasants, city dwellers, for whom it is not easy to understand Church Slavonic speech.
  12. The plot of the life is the spiritual covenant and feat of the saint.	12. The plot depicts national life, customs, family life.

  TEACHER: The left side of the table is filled in advance on the board, and the right side is filled in as a result of the students' answers, these are the results of your work on the cards. Now let’s listen to the student’s message based on V. Surikov’s painting “Boyaryna Morozova”.

  DISCIPLE: Boyarina Morozova is the spiritual daughter of Avvakum. The strength of her protest and commitment shocks the viewer. In the picture, Surikov preserved the features of Russian life of the 16th and 17th centuries: ancient customs, clothing. The stern face of the noblewoman seems to be illuminated by fire. V.I. Surikov joked, saying: “If I wrote hell, then I myself would sit in the fire and force people to pose in the fire.” The story of the noblewoman and her captives Evdokia Ursova and Maria Danilova, “faithful little unfortunates” as Avvakum called them, is so plausibly conveyed.

  Reads out an excerpt from Avvakum’s message to boyar Morozova...

  From this passage we understand that Habakkuk feels like a shepherd, a mentor of “Christ’s flock.” This is his mission. The text is very emotional: from abusive language to tender gratitude. Upholding the truth is the main thing for Avvakum.

  TEACHER: Now, guys, we have come to the point where we need to draw conclusions about the writing activity and innovation of Archpriest Avvakum.

  
  CONCLUSIONS:

  LITERATORS: Writing is inseparable from his preaching activity; everything that Avvakum wrote, from the “Life” to the message to the flock, is imbued with the pathos of defending the old faith.

  
  HISTORIANS: In the history of Russian literature, “Life” occupies a special place. Being a traditionalist in the field of church life, Avvakum acted as an innovator as a writer.
  TEXTOLOGISTS: The style and poetics of his “Life” stand out sharply against the background of the style and literary principles that had previously dominated literature. Innovation was embodied in a pronounced orientation towards vernacular language; he emphasizes that he writes like a simpleton consciously (I love my Russian natural language, I am not in the habit of coloring my speech with philosophical verses)
  LITERATORS: An even greater innovation was that he decided to create his own life and created a brilliant work of the autobiographical genre.
  HISTORIANS: These features: the individuality of the form and content of a literary work. It is not without reason that outstanding writers highly valued his writings, from Dostoevsky and Leskov to Mamin, Sibiryak and Gorky.
  TEXTOLOGISTS: In addition to his life, Avvakum is the author of the “Book of Conversations” and the “Book of Interpretations”, several petitions to the Tsar, letters and messages to the family of the noblewoman Morozova.
  Lesson summary: So, we end the lesson with the fact that what is striking about Habakkuk is his fearlessness, selflessness, fanaticism of faith, and perseverance. His personality reflects some features of the Russian national character: eternal truth-seeking and selfless devotion to faith. Avvakum first spoke out against the cult of the royal personality, so his religious idea acquired a social character. The idea of ​​freedom is modern and relevant.
  Evaluating student answers and commenting on them.
  HOME TASK: 1-2 questions after the article “Russian writers about Archpriest Avvakum.” Anyone interested in the fate of the righteous man in the 20th century, I recommend reading A. Solzhenitsyn’s story “Matrenin’s Dvor”
  part 1

  The need to consider the image in which Habakkuk represents himself in his teaching is explained primarily by the fact that, having understood how the ideologist of the teaching presents himself, it will be possible to finally reveal the direction of the teaching, and therefore resolve the problem posed in the report.

  In his writings, the archpriest, along with belittling his human nature, as mentioned above (see links 86 and 88), still behaves somewhat arrogantly.

  Because his ward turned to a peasant whisperer, Avvakum “got angry with her,” which is true, but further describing the moment when her son came to ask forgiveness for his mother before the archpriest, Avvakum appears in this scene as a superior, telling the boy Who else should he ask for forgiveness from?

  He also sharply reprimands the boyar F.P. Morozova for giving him instructions on how to deal with his spiritual children: “so that I can forbid him from the holy mysteries according to your command to be.”

  IN in this case You should pay attention to the specifics of the “Life” itself. It is known that the “Life” of Habakkuk did not represent a life as such, which is usually assumed according to the canons of writing of this genre. This is an autobiography that “becomes the life of a saint, characterizing his struggle with apostates, work for the glory of Christ.” Moreover, the hagiographic character is exclusively “some external features": "uncertainty of place, time and characters" But during his lifetime, the archpriest was not recognized as a saint, so it is not clear why, while promoting the equality of man to man and denying any hierarchy between people, as well as secular and ecclesiastical power, Avvakum still positions himself as superior. Of course, this can be explained by his duties as a preacher who must instruct and care for his spiritual children. But such mentions, as well as the image that the archpriest draws for himself in this case, do not in any way endear him, but rather repel him, despite the ideas he puts forward.

  On the other hand, Avvakum creates for himself a grandiose image of a fighter for faith and justice. To some extent, he hyperbolizes himself too much, saying: “I know your pure and immaculate, God-imitating life,” “people wandered towards me fearlessly and boldly.” This justifies what he describes life path: it is enough to recall the numerous sufferings that Avvakum and his family endure, wandering from exile to exile: the arbitrariness of Voivode Pashkov, his treatment in “temporary prisons” before being sent into exile (“they kept me at Nikola’s in a cold blanket for seventeen weeks,” “then the packs took me to the Pafnutiev monastery and there, locked in a dark tent, they kept me shackled for almost a year"), the tortures to which schismatics were subjected, for example, cutting out the tongue, as well as cutting off the hands (but in this case, the patronage of the tsar played a big role ), in the end, and the martyrdom of the ideologist of the Old Believers - burning in a log house in Pustozersk. In this case, one cannot but agree with the point of view of V.E. Gusev that “Habakkuk is heroic image. This is a fighter for freedom, “for serving “truth” as “God’s cause””, for unity.

  
  

  Habakkuk glorifies not himself, but God. He pursues the idea of ​​justice sent by God for suffering for his sake: “Have patience with my lights, for the sake of gentlemen, be patient! And do not be discouraged in your souls, but trust in God and the Most Pure Mother of God in prayers and supplications, let us remain kind, let us become strong, my fathers and brothers, and children and sisters, and mothers and daughters!” This is also one of the elements! ideological influence on his followers, namely, “Abakkuk’s speech calls the world to witness his struggle,” but besides this, it is also Avvakum’s personal conviction, his faith.

  Consequently, despite all the inconsistencies in composing his image, Avvakum’s main task in composing it was to show that the main thing is service to God, the willingness to make any sacrifices for him. Therefore, the image of the archpriest is very positive. This is a hero who shows by his example the need to stand for one’s beliefs to the end; a hero who is worthy of imitation and the main content of his activity is not just defending his beliefs, but caring for the human soul.