Pagan.
This word, meaning idolater, is a borrowing from Old Bulgarian where it mattered "Gentile" and was formed as a prefix (tracing paper) from the Greek ethnikos from ethnos - "people".
Glossary of Uspensky.
GENTIAN.
Ancient Bulgarian. In other Bulgarian lang. - derivational wording (tracing paper) Greek. ethnikos "pagan"< "peculiar to (other) peoples", suf. derived from ethnos "people".
Glossary of Shansky.
Pagan.
pagan, other Russian ꙗzychnik, other Bulgarian, zychnik ἐθνικός (Matt. VI, 7, Ostrom., etc.), cslav. derived from ɪzychn, adj. from ɪѧzykъ ἔθνος, wording (tracing paper) Greek. ἐθνικός.
Fasmer's dictionary.
Paganism.
Paganism is a concept accepted in Christian theology, denoting non-Christian beliefs (religions). The concept of paganism comes from the New Testament, in which the peoples or "tongues" were meant by pagans, opposed to early Christian communities
[Buganov V.I., Paganism // Soviet Historical Encyclopedia].
Paganism.
From the point of view of the Abrahamic creeds (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) - other, Not Abrahamic religion.
Paganism.
Slavic word heathen derived from church-glory.ꙗ҆zýкъ, that is, “people”, “tribe”, which in the Slavic translation of the Bible are translated Jewish concepts goy (גוי) And nohri (נָכְרִי).
Wikipedia.
Paganism.
The concept of "paganism" comes from the Church Slavonic word "language", meaning "people". In the Old Testament, the Jews called all other nations Gentiles. From the Jews, the word "paganism" passed into the Christian word. In Christianity, paganism is understood, firstly, as natural knowledge of God, which includes all miraculous beliefs that do not accept the Bible as a source of supernatural Revelation. And secondly, all other non-Christian worldview.
Osipov AI Way of reason in search of truth. Chapter VI. Paganism.
PAGANISM
Paganism - the designation accepted in the Bible heterodoxy. In Russian, this word is a literal translation from Greek ("pagan" - corresponds to the Greek eqnikV). The etymology of both Russian "paganism" and the corresponding words in other European languages (gentile, pagan, dating back to Latin roots, nation - in modern English translation Bible - everything comes from words with the meaning "kind", "people", "tribe") indicates that in the proper sense of the word "pagans" are, first of all "others", "tongues", speaking in tongues that sound incomprehensible. The Latin word paganus in the original sense is rural, common people. This brings the concept of "pagan" closer to other designations. stranger for example, onomatopoeic "barbarian" or Russian "German", the original meaning of which is the same - "not speaking our language."
Sergei Gurko.
Literature:
Fraser D.D. Golden branch. M., 1986
Golosovker Ya.E. Logic of myth, M., 1987
Tylor E. Primitive culture. M., 1992
Freud Z. Psychoanalysis. Religion. Culture. M., 1992
K. Levi-Strauss. Primitive thinking. M., 1994
Malinovsky B. Magic, science and religion. M., 1998
Propp V.Ya. The historical roots of the (fairy) tale. Morphology of a fairy tale. M., 1998
Freud Z. Totem and taboo. M., 2001
Rybakov A.B. The paganism of the ancient Slavs. M., Sofia, 2002.
Encyclopedia Around the World.
Pagans.
pagans - all non-Jews all who worship untrue gods (Ps. 105:35; Matt. 18:17; 1 Pet. 2:12). But God is also the God of the Gentiles (Rom. 3:29) and they are also granted salvation (Is. 11:10; Acts 28:28).
A complete and detailed Bible Dictionary for the Russian canonical Bible. V.P. Vikhlyantsev. 2003.
pagans
Although already V Old Testament all people of non-Israeli origin are promised participation in the salvation and kingdom of the Messiah(1 Kings 8:41ff.; Ps. 2:8; Isaiah 60; 65:1), yet it was difficult for the Jews to accept the gospel of Jesus, which placed Gentiles on an equal footing with Jews, as equally in need of salvation and entitled to the same grace (Acts 10; Rom. 9:30ff.). As appointed by God to preach to the Gentiles, Paul is called the Apostle of the Gentiles(1 Tim. 2:7), while Peter and the rest were “apostles to the circumcised (Gal. 2:8). But, since the Jews stubbornly refused the grace offered to them, judgment came upon them, and the Kingdom of God was given to the Gentiles (Acts 13:46; 1 Thess. 2:16).
Dictionary of biblical names. 2014.
Pagans.
It is mainly used for all other nations except Israel(Deut. 28, 36 - 37; 3 Kings 18, 10, 4 Kings 17, 29, etc.). It began to be used more specifically other nations, as opposed to Israel, after this people completely separated from others, from the time of the prophet Moses, and began to be called the people of God, the people of Israel (Ex. 15, 13 - 16; Deut. 4, 20, etc.). In religious terms, this name is especially often used about atheists, unbelievers, ignorant of the true God, idolaters, ungodly, etc.(Psalm 9:6; Jer. 25:31; 1 Cor. 12:2; 1 Thess. 4:5; Ephesians 2:11, etc.). The name of the pagans was sometimes associated with the concept of contemptible people, whom God himself left to himself, without any providence for them, with whom he should not have communion. But that's how the Gentiles were treated only the later Jews, especially the Pharisees. In the Holy But such an attitude cannot in any case find support in Scripture. All prescriptions of St. the Scriptures to withdraw from the Gentiles, not to have fellowship with them, not to enter into family ties and not to enter into alliances with them - all of them were aimed at protecting the purity of the faith of the people of Israel. In general nowhere is contempt for the pagans to be seen; and we know that, for example, Abraham had pagan allies (Gen. 14:3); David was on friendly terms with the king of Tire (1 Kings 5), with the Queen of Sheba (1 Kings 10), etc. But God, as the Creator and Lord of heaven and earth, is the ruler of all peoples and is the God of the Gentiles, and He never left them without a witness of Himself, not only through the works of creation (Rom. 1:19) and the inner voice of conscience (Rom. 2:14), but also through His chosen people. The initial revelation about the Savior was given to all nations, in the person of the first people(Gen. 3:15). And we know from St. Scriptures that among the pagans there were also God-fearing men, who themselves received instructions and revelations from God. Such, for example, are Melchizedek of Salem, Job in the land of Ausitidia, Prop. Balaam. On the other hand, the light of truth through the people of God also penetrated to the pagans, since, on the one hand, the words of the prophets reached them, on the other hand, many of the pagans were familiar with the Holy Scriptures, especially since during the reign of the Greeks, Holy Scripture was translated into Greek. And when, at the command of the Savior, the apostles went with the preaching of the Gospel throughout the world, the pagans willingly accepted their preaching, which shows how great was the desire for the truth among them. And, according to the promises of God, the Church of Christ must embrace all nations, and God's salvation must spread to all (Gen. 12:3; Luke 2:32; John 10:16, etc.).
Complete Orthodox Theological encyclopedic Dictionary. In two volumes. - St. Petersburg: Publishing House of P. P. Soikin. P. P. Soikin. 1913.
Rus. the word "I." comes from fame. "tongues", i.e. peoples, similar in meaning to other Heb. word "gwjm", which means "peoples", excluding Heb. people. Like the Greek βάρβαρος ("barbarian"), "gwjm" means "foreigners" but if the ancient Greeks identified their nationality with the idea culture, And "barbarian" came to mean one who stands beyond the threshold of culture, then the Jews identified their nationality with theistic idea. religion, And "pagan" came to mean one who is beyond the threshold of this religion. When the world is no longer one, but three theistic. religions - Judaism, Christianity and Islam, they, despite the sharp mutual struggle, do not lose sensations of their joint isolation from the elements of I.- cf. in Islam, the concept of "ahl al-kitab", i.e. "People of the Book" people of biblical faith, to which a Muslim should relate better, than to idolaters. It is also characteristic, for example, that Islam, like Old Testament Judaism before it (in the person of the so-called Deuteroisaiah), practically excludes from the concept of I. Zoroastrianism, which corresponds to supranaturalistich. and premonotheistic. the tendencies of this religion (the Christian tradition of the three wise men also makes the magicians, i.e. the Mithraic Zoroastrians, involved in theology).
Lit .: Florensky P. A., Universal human. roots of idealism, Sergiev Posad, 1909; Kagarov E. T., The cult of fetishes, plants and animals in ancient Greece, St. Petersburg, 1913; Bogaevsky B. L., Agricultural religion of Athens, vol. 1, P., 1916; Zelinsky F. Φ., Ancient Greek. religion, P., 1918; Ivanov V.I., Dionysus and Pradonisism, Baku, 1923; Fraser D., Golden Branch, trans. from English, no. 1-5, M., 1928; Losev A. F., Essays on antique. symbolism and mythology, vol. 1, M., 1930; Preuss K., Der religiose Gehalt der Mythen, Tübingen, 1933; Jung K. G., Kerenyi K., Einführung in das Wesen der Mythologie, , Z., 1951.
S. Averintsev. Moscow.
Philosophical Encyclopedia. In 5 volumes - M .: Soviet Encyclopedia. Edited by F. V. Konstantinov. 1960-1970.
abstract concept "paganism" in Russian appears much later than the exact concepts of "pagan" and "pagan" (Chernykh, 1999, p. 468).
paganism is a term used in Christianity to define non-Abrahamic religions. In a broader and more modern sense, it is common to call paganism any polytheistic or non-traditional religions that are outside of Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism and Buddhism.
In simple terms, Paganism is belief in one of the many ancient religions based on the worship of various gods or supernatural beings that are not related to Christianity, Islam or Judaism. Thus, paganism can be classified as: druidism, shamanism, various Slavic, European and Asian spiritual practices or beliefs. In general, everything that is not a traditional religion, from the point of view of Christianity, is paganism.
Speaking about the essence of paganism as such, it is rather difficult to characterize or describe all the aspects inherent in these beliefs. To a greater extent, this is due to the fact that the so-called "pagan" beliefs, traditions and philosophical currents there are a huge number and they all have their own characteristics. Nevertheless, based on the most common pagan currents, one can outline a general concept. So, the main characteristics or essence of paganism include:
Since most pagan beliefs originate in very ancient times, even before the creation of the concept of "one God", there can be many deities worshiped by pagans. As an example close to us, we can take the beliefs of the Slavic pagans. In their religious view, there were such gods as: Perun ( chief god and god of thunder), Dazhdbog, Svarog, Stribog, Veles and others. As a result, we can say that most pagan religions practice the so-called "polytheism" or belief in many supernatural beings. One very important emphasis should also be made on the fact that paganism as such allows for a variety of opinions. This means that pagans tend to be quite relaxed about the fact that adherents of other religions have their own gods. Unlike traditional religions, in paganism there is no denial of the existence of other, alien deities.
Another common to most pagan practices is the veneration of nature. For example, forests, mountains, lakes or rivers can be very important and revered places. As a rule, these objects are closely related directly to the deities or their actions. In addition, in paganism, great emphasis is placed on the seasons, namely on their changeability. During these periods, there are various holidays, accompanied by various rituals. The earth, or as it is also called "Mother Earth", enjoys special reverence. Many pagans see the earth itself as sacred. For example, in Ancient Greece The first libation of wine has always been offered to the earth.
Although paganism for the most part is devoid of any mandatory, canonical and "true" scriptures, it still has many different rituals and ceremonies. In turn, such rituals are a kind of magical acts that are designed to propitiate or thank the gods. Some of them are supposed to scare away evil spirits or ward off misfortunes. Thus, we can say that the presence of a magical component is a fundamental factor in the concept of pagan beliefs.
As a result, we can only say that paganism is a very ancient belief system that has contributed both to the formation of the "main" religious movements and to the culture of various nations in general. In a sense, it is in paganism, in traditions and rituals, that many of the key factors that have shaped peoples as they are at the moment are stored. And even only from a historical point of view, these belief systems are of great value both for certain peoples and for all of humanity as a whole.
Historical science builds a picture of the past, using the material remains of ancient cultures, which do not always give a complete picture for reliable conclusions and conclusions. Because of this, the existing historical picture of the world is full of myths that are presented as real facts. An example is the myth of the Slavs - pagans.
Little is known about paganism. Once upon a time, the territory of Eurasia was inhabited by Slavic tribes that did not have their own script and culture. They worshiped natural forces, depicting them as idols. And although by now new facts have appeared confirming the high culture of the Slavs, the myth of the savagery of pagan idolaters still dominates historical science.
Meanwhile, the ancestors left a universal "key" to open history: "In the beginning was the Word ...". This phrase is interpreted in any way, but not in the literal sense: the origins of the past must be sought in the Word.
Let us apply this "key" to the word "Gentile." According to the rules of the Russian language, the root here is the word "language". Language is a means of communication between people. The development of the language is the appearance of writing, symbolic (sign) design oral speech. It turns out that "pagans" are those who know the language and have a written language. This conclusion has nothing to do with current historical myth about pagan Slavs.
Word - Glory (transition of letters a-o)
The Slavs were those who glorified the Word and knew how to correct it, that is, apply the rules of the Cyrillic alphabet to the word.
In this sense, the appearance of the word "Orthodoxy" is interesting. Initially, “Orthodox” are people who knew how to “correct” the Word. And the meaning in which this word is used today appeared later.
It was with the help of the Word that our ancestors created an illusory story, hiding the real story behind fairy tales and myths, including myths for adults (they did this for very good and objective reasons). And without knowledge of the Cyrillic alphabet, its rules, people cannot understand the authenticity of certain historical events.
Who were these people who glorified and ruled the Word?
Vedic Apiary culture - the basis of world cultures was created by the people of Apiary:
Apiary people - honey people - demos honey - dem os(s) honey (honey wasps = bees)
Dem os honey - the people of OS honey - the people of On The word honey (in Cyrillic O=He, C=Word) - the people of the honey word.
"dem" is back side the words "med": dem / honey, or otherwise, this is a manifestation of the Cyrillic rule about the reality and navi of words or its direct and reverse reading.
Only together these two parts of the word give the full image of the word: demmed.
"Demmed" or Demid(ovy) is the image of the Pasieki people who created the culture:
Culture - cult at ra - cheers to ult - uraul (ya) t - cheers at lt - uralt - Ural t - Ural firmly (T \u003d Firmly) - Ural door then ... (transition of letters d-t)
Ural, Demidovs… This is not a coincidence as a result of a play on words. And the “people of honey” is not only the family of the Ural Demidovs, it is, for example, the famous family of the Medici.
"Demidovs" is a beekeeper's image, the history of the people of Pasieki is as old as the history of mankind.
Reviews
IN Greek peoples professing polytheism were called the word "ethnos". This word is familiar to us by the name of the science of "ethnography" (descriptions of peoples) or "ethnic" (folk). In Church Slavonic, the word "ethnos" corresponded to the word "languages". Therefore, in the Russian language, those who profess pre-Christian or non-Christian religions began to be called "pagans." Proceeding from this, many church authorities called pagans both Muslim monotheists, and polytheists-Cheremis (Mari), and followers of Hinduism.
Interestingly, in Latin the word "paganism" corresponds to the word "paganismus". In Latin, the word "paganus" means "village".
In Rus', pagans were also called "nasty"
From the life of Andrei Bogolyubsky
“When the Church of the Nativity of the Virgin was completed, Andrey was especially happy and proud to show it to everyone passing by:
“Whether a guest came from Constantinople or from other countries, from the Russian land or a Latin, and every Christian or filthy, then Prince Andrei ordered: take him to church and on the floor, even if the filthy one sees true Christianity and is baptized, which happened. .. seeing the glory of God and the decoration of the church, they were baptized. "
If peoples = languages, then in the myth of the Tower of Babel, a tautology turns out: peoples were divided by peoples or languages by languages :-) It is impossible to divide peoples by languages, you can always explain yourself minimally with gestures, besides, there have always been translators-interpreters. Nations can be divided by faith, and today's world is an example of this.
All this is not so simple. Read Lukashevich about what happened with the languages, how, to whom and why they gave the language in varying degrees different from the language of Adam. If, of course, it is interesting.
They laughed at him and called him crazy.
However, he found the keys that can open any language. The way languages were mixed.
Here are the titles. in general, the texts can be found on the internet, but the old links do not work. http://goo.gl/7Arj9K
You know, I would not recommend Lukashevich's works to anyone, with the exception of root words. And here's why: despite the fact that P.A. Lukashevich wholeheartedly supported the purity of the language, the main idea was to fight against everything “non-Russian”. And this is a message to national enmity and this is wrong.
“A long time ago our language could be a model of frequency…” P. Lukashevich.
Who hinders the search for the origins of the purity of the language? Only these searches are not at all about fighting the “charm-mution”. And the majority of modern followers of Lukashevich are only doing this, and, as they please, everyone in their own way. Finding enemies is always easier than learning to think.
And this is generally strong: “The Lord humbled the pride of man by mixing languages. This confusion is enchantment." P. Lukashevich. So he, it turns out, speaking out against "charm-mutation", fought with God ...
As for the confusion of languages, it is natural process communication of people, if they live in the neighborhood, there is an interpenetration of cultures and languages. If they are at war, then this is an almost impossible process, due to the hatred of opponents for each other.
Remember the Great Patriotic War, the most popular German phrases that have taken root are “Hitler Kaput” and “Hyundai Hoch”, so what?
Why did the mixing of languages should have been more active in time immemorial, as a result of wars with the Slavs of various conquerors, as Lukashevich writes?
About 150 years have passed since the writing of books by P. Lukashevich, who angrily accused the French language, at that time it was relevant, but today? Today the dominance of Americanisms, but another 150 years will pass, so what? The Russian language was, is and will be, and it will always contain certain words from other languages.
We have a common word that unites us, which came from the depths of centuries. We are pagans. There is no other such word. Another name, for example, "Natural Faith" only refines this ancient word. Names such as "Vedic religion" or "pre-Christian faith" are invented today and do not have the proper strength in themselves. The direct bearers of the Vedic religion never called themselves that, and no one called them that in their time. historical life. By the way, the first Christians also did not call themselves "Christians" - this is what the pagans of ancient times called them - after the name of the Messiah revered by them ("Christ worshipers").
The creators of new self-names do not want to soil themselves with the dirt that world mono-religions have inflicted on paganism. They are cunning or sincerely do not realize that if "do not get dirty", then this means "do not take it into your hands." And if you don’t “take it into your hands”, then all these new “Vedic orthodox believers” will be filled with content that is not related to our historical paganism. It will simply be Russian-Slavic rehashings of Indian religions, there will be a profanation of our national paganism, a remake sewn from patches of foreign traditions.
Among a certain part of modern pagans, there is an opinion that pagan ancestors called themselves Orthodox, because, they say, they "praised the rule." It is possible that somewhere there were "Orthodox" pagans, but, in fairness, it should be noted that not a single historical evidence of such a self-name of the ancient Slavic pagans has been preserved.
Let's analyze the essence of the word "right" in order to understand - should the pagans be called "Orthodox"? Rule is included in such our modern words, as "truth", "right" (in the sense of fair), "rule", "rule" (country or boat), "ruler". So, the word "rule" refers mainly not to the conduct of the boat (for example, along the river of life), but to the ideological justification of government, to the justification of the power of the prince. To his "just judgment", which always had to be in accordance with the will of the gods.
But someone was satisfied with the power of the prince and his truth, but someone was not satisfied. A thousand years ago, in the very depths of the forests, the freedom-loving tribes of the Drevlyans, Vyatichi and Radimichi lived, they did not let anyone in, so that they would not know their land and the princes from Kiev or Novgorod would not go to them with armies. With the expansion of the range of princely power, the Vyatichi went to the northeast, and the independent land of the Drevlyans and Radimichi narrowed to Polesie. On this earth, free people were called by a word opposite to "princely truth." They were called "Krivichi" (by the way, Lithuanians to this day often call Russians "Krivi"). The Krivichi were a union of tribes, they were blood brothers, and a special place in their religious veneration was assigned to female deities and coastlines.
Let us remember that the title of the Baltic High Priest Krive-Kriveite is translated as Teacher of Teachers, and not at all as a teacher of untruth. The self-name "Krivichi" and the title of the high priest of the Balts become close, if you pay attention to the fact that a significant part of the population of the land of the Krivichi was of Baltic origin, and that a significant part of the territory of the present Baltic was inhabited by Slavic tribes. Over time, many Balts became Russified and began to classify themselves as Slavs, and many geographical names of rivers and villages remained of Baltic origin. The same should have been the case for sacred concepts, including such as "crooked". This approach naturally forces us to change the flat idea of the origin of the words truth and falsehood.
As you know, the Krivichi long and stubbornly resisted the introduction of Christianity, held on to the "old faith" and the "old gods". Perhaps this is also why the word "curve" has acquired a negative connotation. There were, of course, those Slavic tribes that did not actively oppose themselves to anyone - neither to the will of the prince, nor to his priests, who performed the task of their master in the mass baptism of the population. These tribes lived peacefully and quietly, but even they did not realize that they should somehow designate themselves by faith. But their language worked for them. In Old Russian, "tongues" means "peoples". Therefore, by the nature of the language, the pagan faith is the faith of the common people, who are naturally close to the earth.
As soon as the Christian priests realized that their task included not only the ideological suppression of the Krivichi (Krivi) who stubbornly held onto their faith, but also the subordination of the “black people” (village residents) to the prince, then among the servants of the new Christian cult, the already existing in language the generalizing word: "paganism". In general and initially - they did not put a negative meaning into it, as they did with the word "crooked", putting into it the meaning of falsehood - deceit. By "paganism" they understood beliefs, as well as spiritual and legal institutions that turned out to be outside the prince's truth, beyond his power. Therefore, the word "paganism" gradually acquired the spirit of something suspicious, but not yet received an accurate assessment. He was connected directly with "demons and demons" by later strengthened Christianity.
The very word "paganism" was not created or invented by priests - neither pagan nor Christian. It was already contained in the Slavic language before them as a generalizing concept (the word "paganism" comes from the root "language", which Old Church Slavonic means "people, tribe"). It was supposed to sound when the princes approved any new official deity and carried out his cult to the people. So it should have been when Vladimir Perun was approved in Kyiv and Novgorod. So it happened later, with the introduction of Christianity. The fact that Christianity is not just a cult of a new god, but carries a qualitatively different spiritual content, was still little understood by the Russian people, in the time of Vladimir. The priests of the official cult called "pagans" the tribes that did not follow the princely cult with its new crucified god (Christianity), but believed in their own way, in the "old gods". They were considered "black people" if they were submissive to the prince, and they turned out to be "Krivichi" if they lived from the side of Lithuania and did not agree with the prince's policy.
As already noted, the very word "languages" means, firstly, "peoples". Secondly, it also meant a speaker, a person who conveys a message. So, in Afanasyev's fairy tale "Ivan the Fool", published in 1855, we find: "Ilya Muromets killed everyone, left only the pagans to the king." It follows that in addition to the concept of "people", the word "pagan" also contains another concept - "messenger", or one who speaks ("speaking", i.e. "knowing the word"). If we combine both of these ancient concepts, then we can easily see that in a religious sense, a pagan is one who carries news, knowledge, a word about the religion and faith of his people. And if today we say that we are pagans, it means that we are messengers, we carry the message: "it's time for our people to remember their original beginnings."
IN Latin countries the synonym for paganism was the word "paganism", derived from the word "paganus" - "tiller" (more broadly - "rural, village dweller", "redneck"). For many modern Slavic pagans, it does not seem very decent to be called a pagan or filthy - here the language forms developed over a thousand years, clichés and patterns imposed by those who decried and destroyed the ancient Natural Faith are pressing. But Western European pagans freely call themselves "Paganists". For example, when the Lithuanian pagans learned that the Russians were embarrassed by their self-name (“pagans”), they were surprised: how can the Russian pagans renounce themselves? Indeed, to refuse such high rank as "pagans" - to humiliate themselves before the authorities and priests; in front of those who themselves (once upon a time) changed this word "in a crooked way" - just like many other words related to folk / natural faith. The same is true with other words, for example with the word "blasphemous." In pagan terms, this means - "perform pagan hymns, songs or tales about the deeds of the gods and the afterlife." In modern language, it means to say something that defiles some kind of holiness. This is also the result of thousands of years of work of Christianity on our language.
Historical truth will be restored. We must return to our everyday life such necessary words as "paganism" or "blasphemers", and not be ashamed of them only because mountains of lies have been piled on them. After all, we are not afraid of this lie. Therefore, let's be honest and consistent.
The problem of somehow naming their faith, and even more so of naming the type of their faith, could arise among the Slavs only with the beginning of the expansion of monotheistic religions. Prior to this, there was no need to give a name to your faith, the faith of your ancestors - it was called just that: "faith", "our faith", "faith of the ancestors" or "Slavic, Russian faith". Actually, faith was - in fact - one common to many peoples; the concept of faith was broader than the concept of the tribe. And the Slavs, and the Germans, and the Scandinavians - all were pagans and, in general terms, adhered to the same pantheon and belief system. Moreover, all sorts of more distant neighbors - all without exception were pagans.
The difference was only in the specific names of the same gods, or in which of them occupies the "main" place in the composition of a particular pantheon (and, consequently, the main, most noticeable from the outside, place in the cult), or in the composition itself. pantheon. Hence the variants of names for specific varieties of beliefs - either by the name of the tribe (the faith of the ancestors, the faith of the Slavs, the Busurman faith), or by the name of the "main" deity (fire-worshippers, Jesusists). There were simply no other names. There were not only "atheistic cults" around (such as "scientific atheism"), but also "author's" religions (such as Mohammedanism, Judaism, Zoroastrianism), which claimed not one single tribe, but an alternative to the entire generally accepted system of beliefs (For example, Judaism among the Khazars was called by neighbors only as "Khazar faith").
Thus, the Slavs (like all neighboring tribes and peoples) did not and could not have any special name for the faith of their ancestors, and even more so for the type of faith itself. Some conditionally generalizing names (for clarification in conversations with strangers) could be, but most often, of course, the name was used by belonging to a tribe (depending on the context - more general or more particular) - Slavic faith, faith of the Polyans, faith of the Normans, etc. .
The need to determine the type of one's faith in opposition to faith of a fundamentally different type arose only in theological disputes during the period of dual faith - when it was necessary to oppose the faiths of all peoples in aggregate with monotheistic religions. This is how the concepts of "paganism" and "paganism" arose. According to the most linguistically substantiated versions, both of these words come (in fact) from the concept of "people" (respectively, in Slavic "language" - people, and in Latin "pagan" - rural, rural, soil - in terms of meaning, these are synonyms for the word " people").
These words mean "folk faith", as a type of traditional beliefs of all peoples. Therefore, in this context, it is more correct to speak not about paganism in general, but more specifically about Slavic paganism. There is no way to determine which side of the theological dispute put forward it - this term is equally acceptable to both sides. Considering it invented by Christians to humiliate pagans is as stupid as considering the word "monotheism" offensive to Christians. This is a completely neutral scientific term, which very clearly and correctly draws a line between natural (natural) beliefs and artificial monotheistic denominations such as Christianity, Judaism and Islam.
All the emotions [of some pagans who do not want to call themselves "pagans" and their faith "paganism"] about the name of our faith are absolutely understandable, but naturally one has to reckon with the surrounding reality. If there is a war going on between the "Whites" and the "Reds", between the "Point-Tipped" and the "Dull-Tipped" (an analogy, of course, does not apply to the essence of the process), then say something like "I wear a green tunic and, therefore, that says it all" - it means not to say anything definite. In fact, you still have to explain in a roundabout way that in fact you are "White", "Red" or some other, but you do not want to talk about it directly. It is in this way that any explanation of abstract self-definitions will be perceived by everyone.
We repeat once again - the emotions are understandable: the word "pagan" is not the most successful, but it is a very specific neutral scientific term. In any reference book, article, encyclopedia, everyday conversation, criminal case - we will still be called "pagans". Up to our complete victory and even further - already as a result of the tradition that has arisen. Remember - the name "Bolsheviks" has remained with the Communists to this day. What can you do if monotheists (and Christians in particular) plowed up almost all the terms that belonged to the pagan religious sphere? But this does not mean that now it is impossible to use the words "requirement", "goblin", "witch", "naznik", "accomplice", "supervisor", "sorcerer", "blasphemy", "get out", etc. But, on the other hand, the reality of the consequences of [Christian] foreignness must also be taken into account - calling our faith "Orthodoxy" (as some "praise praising" pagans do *) is also not very reasonable in this situation.
Finally, to finally resolve the issue of the origin of the word "paganism", let's turn to an academic scientific publication. So, "Old Slavonic Dictionary (according to manuscripts of the 10th-11th centuries): About 10,000 words; Moscow; Russian language; 1994; - 842 p.". An article in Old Church Slavonic and Ancient Greek, the following is written (4 fixed values):
"LANGUAGE" -
1. language (organ) ...
2. language (speech) ...
3. people, tribe... For example, "tongue on tongue"; "Yes, one h (love) to die for the people, and not the whole language will perish"; "vskuyu shyatashya ezytsi"; "as if pr (oro) ka bo put thee in the tongue", etc. [characteristically, this word is used even in relation to Christians! ].
4. strangers, foreigners; pagans ... For example: "all of them are languages ishtut; idols of the language (s) to silver and gold" ...
Here one can clearly see the original ancient meaning the words "language" - "people" (owning a certain language). Also here one can clearly see the beginning of the opposition by Christians of the meanings of the word in question: "folk, natural" & "Christian, divine".
Thus, everyone can choose for himself in what meaning to use the word "paganism" - either in the original 3rd meaning (that is, according to ancient meaning), or in the 4th later meaning (that is, changed under the influence of Christianity).
Also in explanatory dictionary V.Dalya can find the meaning of the word "language": "a people, a land, with its same-tribe population, with the same speech." Thus, "paganism" for the Slavs is, first of all, a folk, primordial, Native Tradition. Accordingly, paganism is tribal beliefs, and in this sense it has long been used by our ancestors. So, pagans are people who belong to the same clan-tribe, who honor its customs, love and protect their land, keep tribal myths and reproduce these relationships in new generations. At the same time, the land, the tribe that inhabits it, other forms of life and the gods form a single tribal whole, which is reflected in tribal myths and rituals, in the way of life and management.
Do not be ashamed of the name "pagan". It is not necessary, if only for the reason that all Christians shudder at this one word: they are afraid of it like fire, like excommunication from the parish humanitarian trough; for them the word "pagan" is more terrible than "satanist". Have you ever seen the pitiful white frightened face of a Christian who accidentally wandered into the forest to the pagans and found out where he ended up? The phrase: "I am a pagan" sounds proud and militant; it strikes the enemy like lightning; it contains the power of a millennial spiritual confrontation with [Christian] foreignness.
There is nothing offensive in the word "paganism" for the pagans themselves.
The fact that such words as "paganism" = "paganism" are today almost swear words for some pagans, speaks only of the results of Christian propaganda, and nothing more ("propaganda" in Latin - ideological "work" among the pagans). What can we say, many centuries have passed, the language has changed, many concepts have changed, and today almost all words related to paganism and the pagan worldview in one way or another have been turned into curse words (see examples above). On this basis, to engage in word-creation (and in fact verbiage) and invent some new words for everyone and everything is at least stupid and even one-god (monotheists) have too much honor. It is much more reasonable to direct the same efforts to ensure that completely different words that really deserve it become abusive.
It is also important that by the very fact of calling ourselves "pagans", we select the same Bogey, with the help of which some try to belittle those they do not like. We are not afraid to call ourselves "pagans" and even "pagans" - there is a Slavic pagan community in Belarus, whose representatives do not hesitate to call themselves just like that - but after that, any detractors simply have nothing to hide.
Analogy: at one time in the States, the word "cop" was abusive (as well as the word "cop" in our country), but time has passed, and now every American policeman can proudly say "yes, I'm a cop." This positive image, as well as the word it stands for, has been created for decades with the help of films and daily work the law enforcement agencies themselves; the same process has begun with us - books with the mention of the word "cop" are already being published, the television series "Cops" has been released, and after a couple of decades no one will even remember that once a word was for someone abusive or inelegant. That's about the same thing can happen with the word "paganism" (as well as with any other word). Moreover, this has already happened in antiquity, when Christians took it into their arsenal and used it all as "chasing" - now it remains only to return it to our arsenal.
And, what can we say, when the word "symposium", commonly used even in high politics, comes from the Greek "drinking party"; and the word "pluralism" in the ancient Greeks meant multiple copulations during an orgy. And the word "pagan" against this background looks much more decent: just something like "soil, rural, rural." Simply, in later times this word was used by Christians, who contemptuously called adherents of the faith of their ancestors "hillbilly", considering them unenlightened and dark, when they stubbornly did not want to convert to the "true faith of Christ." And such a word as "paganism" and in general has the root "people" ("language"), that is, "pagans" are essentially "populists" - such a translation is the most elegant, and therefore this particular translation will be used henceforth ( whatever lovers of "originality" and other historical naphthalene say, dreaming of the "harmony of a stagnant swamp" and not understanding that everything changes and must change - for Movement is Life).
In all official papers - statutes, names of communities, etc. it is necessary to use the term "paganism" or the phrase "Slavic paganism". Otherwise, we are closed to the creation of an all-Russian confession and the recognition of modern Slavic paganism as the historical successor to the pre-Christian beliefs of the Slavs. For any religious examination, appointed in such cases according to the current legislation, recognizes our entire movement as just a collection of small scattered sects belonging to various newly minted faiths that have nothing to do with the ancient Slavic faith (Slavic paganism) and, therefore, fundamentally unable to be considered as belonging to traditional Russian confessions. Accordingly, the official (registered in the authorities) name of the community as "pagan" should be considered the only acceptable one. The sooner we can achieve universal acceptance of this term, directly in line with the goals of our entire movement, the better.
In this regard, it should be especially noted that no one calls for calling themselves only "pagans" (or even, for example, "pagans"). On the contrary, any other identifiers can be used in parallel, such as "rodnovers", "rodnovers", "rodyans", "polytheists", "traditionalists", "pantheists", etc. It's just that one should not be afraid and should not be ashamed of strangers (and indeed of any kind) Labels and Bogeys used by motley detractors - only then will they cease to be such. We have already selected them and, if necessary, we will select them again. You just need to not be afraid of anything and calmly do your job.
[* To call paganism "Orthodoxy" ("Glorification of the Rule") is historically and linguistically illiterate. Nowhere and in no historical sources even a hint is not mentioned that the pagan Slavs, they say, "praised the Rule" (all the more, why praise it? Will it wither away without glorification, or what? Rule - these are the laws of the Universe, perfectly managing even without human participation). Being extremely honest, one has to reckon with the facts. And the fact is that "Orthodoxy" is a literal tracing-paper from the Greek "orthodoxis": from "orthos" - "correct" & "doxa" - "faith in", "opinion about" (someone), "good name ", "glory", "(pro) glorification"; i.e., the word "Orthodoxy" has the meaning of "correctly glorify" (the Judeo-Christian God, respectively). The given etymology of the word "Orthodoxy" is officially scientific and is shared by all modern historians and linguists. Citizens who disagree with this can try to provide evidence of their point of view in strict accordance with scientific methodology: 1) facts, 2) sources, 3) references, 4) reasoned justifications. Before bringing all of the above - any statement has no scientific value, but is only an opinion (which may well turn out to be erroneous; and that is why evidence and sufficient reasons are required).]
