The experience of the procedural interpretation of the absolute based on the teachings of Jesus

Chekrygin Oleg ORCID: 0009-0007-4393-1445 PhD in Philosophy independent researcher 24 Serpukhov val str., Moscow, 115419, Russia ochek@bk.ru Other publications by this author     Nadeina Dar'ya ORCID: 0009-0006-6063-8171 applicant; Institute of Philosophy of St. Petersburg State University; St. Petersburg State University 115682, Russia, Moscow, Orekhovy str., 59 Bogoslovblog@gmail.com Other publications by this author

Mezentsev Ivan Valer'evich ORCID: 0009-0008-8723-5641 PhD in Philosophy independent researcher 690025, Russia, Primorsky Krai, Vladivostok, Dzhambula str., 7, sq. 1 mezivan@yandex.ru Other publications by this author

Introduction.

The authors consider one of the main problems of the crisis of classical philosophy to be the ontological impasse that inevitably arises in the idea of a Platonic Single Superbeing as a faceless Law, the Absolute, the First Principle of everything, in the form of an aporia of transcendence. A specialist in Platonic philosophy, S. V. Month, points out that the aporia of the transcendent principle is the central problem of Neoplatonism. Describing the attempts of the Neoplatonists to overcome the inconsistency of the origin of plurality from the One (fundamentally non-plural), which they inherited from Plotinus, who identified the Root Cause of all things with the one of the First hypothesis of "Parmenides", the researcher shows that ultimately, at the end of the great philosophical tradition, the Neoplatonists confessed their own powerlessness to give a positive explanation of this most important metaphysical principle"Finally, Damasky shows the fundamental insolubility of the aporia of the transcendent principle. He considers it inevitable to describe the Absolute in contradictory terms as both "one" and "not-one", and "beginning" and "non-beginning", seeing in such antinomies a natural consequence of attempts to think of something that transcends all thought and word" ^[1]. The Absolute, as a platonic Single Super-Being, cannot manifest itself in any way in the existence of a world for which it does not exist, as well as the world for it, they are Nothing to each other, and such a God cannot in any way become the beginning, or be the creator of the world and the creator of being. At the same time, the human mind is able to draw for itself the only conclusion regarding the Super–Existent Incomprehensible: if God exists as the source of all things, then he cannot be anything but the Absolute, which is everything and apart from which there is nothing - otherwise the creation of the imperfect ideal simply will not take place. Indeed, if there is something else besides God that exists on a par with him, then one must seek an even higher Creator who created both, or recognize the primacy of the undivine substratum from which God appears as his offspring.

So, the Absolute is an ideal that contains everything.: both the existent and the non–existent, and who gave everything that exists to be, and everything that does not exist to not be – this is the initial setting of classical ontology, which inevitably leads to a complete stasis of the Absolute: "In an extremely abstract form, the aporia of the transcendent principle is revealed in the 1st hypothesis of Plato's dialogue "Parmenides". It is shown here that if we consider the one in itself, regardless of everything that does not coincide with it, then any definition of existence will have to be denied with respect to such a one. In this case, we will have to say that it does not exist, including as a single one. It is “neither identical to itself or to another, nor distinct from itself or from another.” This means that one cannot say about it “the one is the one”, because it is devoid of any certainty and meaning that would distinguish it from other things and make it something existing alongside them. It also does not differ from anything else, i.e. it does not allow anything else outside of itself. Being such and denying its other, the one cannot be the beginning" ^{[2, p. 660]}

Nevertheless, the authors set themselves the task of understanding the possibility of the ontological descent of Absolute stasis into the Existence of the world as preached by Jesus as God the Father on the basis of the new ontological perspective developed by the authors in previous publications ^{[3, 4]}, which is what this publication is dedicated to.

1. The subject, methodology and scientific novelty of the research.

The subject of the research is the application of the dialectical method developed by the authors to build ontological levels based on the principle of mutual reflection of entities with their negations, which reveals the transition through a sequence of such reflections in three stages from the static Absolute-the First Principle to God the Father, generated in the existence of the world only in the mind of a person for whom God exists. The reverse reflection of the mind that has come to know God generates an immortal soul not in a mortal body (Spirit and matter cannot be reduced to each other, preserving an ontological difference), but outside of existence – in the world of the Spirit, in the Kingdom of the Father, who, for lack of his own needs, is ready to fulfill the will of the born-Again (John 3:5)..

This is how man's desired freedom of will is realized through the exercise of God's will: at the request of his own, born into Eternity, God changes Providence, and the world changes without the direct intervention of Spirit in matter, which is impossible because of their mutual irreducibility to each other. In this way, God changes the world without interfering in it, according to the will of a person who is concerned about the fate of those who are dear to him in the world.

The ways proposed by the authors to resolve the fundamental theoretical difficulties of both the classical model of the Absolute (based on the primacy of static) and attempts to overcome it in the latest conceptualizations of the Absolute (in particular, in the experiments of constructing a procedural interpretation of the Original in process theism), the construction of a new ontological perspective in solving the aporia of transcendence, as well as the proposed solution to the difficulties in the field of correlation From the point of view of the authors, free will and predestination represent an essential scientific novelty that may be of interest to the entire scientific and philosophical community.

The research methodology includes, first of all, a historical and philosophical analysis of typical conceptualizations of the Absolute in European thought, systematic and interdisciplinary approaches that allow us to look at sustainable solutions to the stated problem structurally and from different angles, thus deepening the prospects for understanding the main ways of updating the possibilities of interpreting the Absolute in our days.

The method of analogies is also used, which made it possible, through conceptual and phenomenological analysis, as well as the use of natural philosophical approaches based on modern discoveries of natural science, taking into account parallels with the structural laws of being in the field of quantum mechanics, to move to an intuitive analysis of the Incomprehensible and propose a consistent model for solving aporias of transcendence, freedom and predestination, as well as the falsifiable verifiability of God's presence in the world in the form of faith in God in the human mind and nowhere else.

In this sense, from the point of view of the authors, modern approaches of experimental philosophy are promising.: The methodology of surveys about the existence and non-existence of God is relevant, which are able to confirm the falsifiability and, consequently, the scientific nature of the discovery of God in existence: for some people there is a God, and for others there is no God, which, in turn, confirms the evidence of the ontological argument in favor of the existence of God.

2. Historical and philosophical review: The Absolute as a religious and philosophical concept and the problems of its absolute static nature.

The concept of "absolute" has a long history, during which the main types of possibilities for its interpretation have been identified. Initially, European philosophy freed the Absolute from variability, assimilating static to it as an integral aspect of its perfection, which created a problem.: How can absolute statics trigger the dynamics of space?

In this regard, let us pay attention to the problems of understanding the Absolute in the Greek segment of the history of European philosophy. First of all, we note the following: Being is the nature of natural philosophers, and the Unity or Simplicity of metaphysicians are two really different views of the Beginning. "The Absolute, which is the very essence of existence, and the Absolute, which transcends all nature, are reducible to each other only in their common originator: in the classical ancient question "What is Everything", which resulted in an equally classical (almost ritualistic) answer"Everything is One"" ^[5].

Plato's formal definition of the Absolute corresponds to the Unity of the first hypothesis of "Parmenides" and the Good of the "State." A follower of Plato, Plotinus, being at the stage of completing and finalizing Platonic thought, identifies his Absolute – the One or the One Itself – with the One of the first hypothesis of Plato's "Parmenides". Plotinus says: "And Plato's Parmenides distinguishes in clearer terms between the first one, that is, the one in the proper sense of the word; the second, which he calls "one-many"; and the third — "one and many"" ^{[6, p. 333]}. In Neoplatonism, the One as such is devoid of a mental, vital and volitional principle, it lacks energy, movement and process in any sense.

Despite the fact that in the logic of radical apophatics, the opposites of "rest" and "movement" must be overcome in the One, nevertheless, when trying to comprehend it, it seems static rather than dynamic. Processality is associated with variability, from which the genuine "super"-being in Platonism is separated.

For Aristotle, the "absolute" is self–thinking, a cosmic Prime Mover that "thinks for itself, if only it is superior and its thinking is thinking about thinking" ^{[7, p. 316]}. Aristotle's God thinks only of Himself, so the question of starting the world movement with an immobile entity hangs in the air. Moreover, it is well known that the God of the Stagyrite is personally not concerned with the fate of the world or even the very fact of its eternal existence "around" it and in connection with it.

Platonism and Aristotelianism had a significant influence on the formation of the static interpretation of the Absolute in Christianity. At the same time, already in early patristics, a certain process is revealed in the Christian God-Trinity. According to Basil the Great (and other fathers after him), the "tropos of existence" of divine hypostases is contrasted with the "logos of nature", which is unknowable. The "existence" of the Father as the "fatherland" shows the absolute static nature of God the Father, as the eternal unchanging primordial root cause of everything. However, God the Father, who has taken the place of the neoplatonic One Absolute, turns out to be an eclectic combination of the unconnected: he is eternal and unchangeable, but he reveals a process in the form of the creation of the creative Son, the Word, and the outflow of the peacemaking energy of the Holy Spirit from him; like the Neoplatonic One superbeing, he is predicative, that is, according to the theology developed by the great Cappadocians, he is unknowable "according to the logos of his nature," but at the same time appears in theology as a divine personality possessing omniscience, omnipotence, omnipotence and omnipotence, manifested first in the birth of His Son and the exodus of the Spirit from Him, and then in the creation of the world out of nothing out of "abundance of goodness"; transcendent to the world so as not to "get infected" it depends on him materially, but is also immanent to him, first creating him out of nothing, then arranging his existence according to his Providence for him, and then intervening in the manual control of him, either by the Holy Spirit, or with the help of uncreated energies of Palamas. As we can see, the process unfolding both in God himself and by God in the world is obvious: the personality of God the Father, as an acting god, is far from identical to the faceless Single Super-Being of the Neoplatonists, but rather corresponds to their second ontological level of the One Being, the Mind, that is, the former Absolute, who revealed himself in being a self-conscious personality.

Further, the process of divine evolution developed in the writings of the Scholastics. Of the greatest interest in this sense are the works of Eriugena, who was the first to suggest the possibility of divine evolution as a process of self-knowledge of the deity.: The eternal God himself does not know himself, since He is infinite and boundless, and therefore indefinite ^{[8, I, 11]}. "The act of creation of the universe is at the same time an act of Divine self-knowledge. God recognizes himself in the Son-Logos, i.e., thereby in the act of creating truly existing ideas; in this act, God himself receives his being in accordance with the principle: "The knowledge of what exists is that which [itself] exists" ^{[9, p. 160.]}.

Philosophers of the Middle Ages traditionally understood God as the supreme Good, existing through and out of himself, as absolute freedom, as absolute unity. At that time, the concept of "absolute" was used only as a predicate in relation to God, which, as we understand it, detracts from its meaning, reducing it from the pedestal of the highest First Principle of everything (including the God of existence) to the position of an auxiliary functional of world divinity. The mere use of the concept of "absolute" as a predicate introduces us to the problem of correlating this concept with the non-absolute.

For scholasticism, "Absolute" means, as a rule, "perfect" in relation to God. For Thomas Aquinas, who combined Aristotelian philosophy with the negative theology of the Areopagites, God is "actus purus", i.e., pure reality, being in a primary and complete embodiment, which differs from any limited earthly existence – which again corresponds to the ontological level of the Neoplatonist Mind, but by no means to a Single superbeing. For Aquinas, "only one God is a pure act (actus purus)", and only in Him "substance, being and actions are identical" ^{[10, p. 661]}. Subsequently, Nikolai Kuzansky connected the concept of the absolute with the absolute maximum: "The absolute maximum is the one that is everything" ^{[11, p. 51.]}. For the Kuzan, the difference between possibility and being disappears in the Absolute, which again indicates the substitution of the concept of the absolute Absolute of antiquity by some maximum of being, thereby already comparable with the existence of the world, which is declared absolute in the sense of the greatest possible. This is where the drift begins to replace the concept of the Absolute as the First Principle through its identification with God, the Creator, as an acting personality.

In the philosophy of Benedict Spinoza, the doctrine of an absolutely infinite reality occupies a central place.: "By God, I mean an absolutely infinite being, i.e., a substance consisting of infinitely many attributes, each of which expresses an eternal and infinite essence" ^{[12, pp. 361-362]}, which generally corresponds more to the ontological level of the Soul as a set of like-minded ideas among Neoplatonists than to their very Unity, thereby lowering The ontological level of the Absolute is already two orders of magnitude. The Absolute as the First Principle is replaced, in fact, by a set of ideas of things, the pantheistic identity of God and the world, in which the Absolute retains the features of the First Principle of everything, but is reduced to the concept of "the essence of things", and at the same time imperceptibly endowed with personality in the concept of "being". G.V. Leibniz introduces the concept of "necessitas absoluta" – "absolute necessity," which he understands as the foundation of the world, the last reason. The Absolute as the first cause is reduced here to the necessity of being, the existence of the world – which in the Absolute is just not justified by anything – and the Absolute from the first cause becomes the last cause of the development of being, which the Absolute is not at all, but on the contrary, is the complete absence of any causality of the manifestation of the non-absolute: "God is the first cause of things; for limited objects what things we see and feel are accidental and have nothing in themselves that would make their existence necessary, since it is obvious that time, space and matter, being one and uniform in themselves and indifferent to everything, could take on completely different movements and shapes and in a different order. Therefore, we must look for the reason for the existence of the world, which is a collection of accidental things; and we must look for it in a substance that has the basis of its existence in itself and, therefore, is necessary and eternal. It is also necessary that this reason be reasonable" ^{[13, pp. 109-110]}. Then, in their correspondence, F. G. Jacobi and M. Mendelssohn call Spinoza's God or the nature of things the "absolute". Jacobi raises the question of how legitimate it is to identify the philosophical concept of the Absolute with God, concluding that the God of the Bible is more exalted than God, who is only the Absolute. And now the personal biblical (absolutely anthropomorphic) god is placed above the Absolute, which is reduced to a certain law of being established by God (perhaps Providence).

In Modern European philosophy, the development of pantheistic tendencies in the interpretation of the absolute continued, and at the same time, the process of forming new ideas about personality as such, which are associated with the Cartesian understanding of consciousness (self-awareness), was launched. In the 19th century, we see, on the one hand, the development of the pantheistic interpretation of the absolute in German philosophy, on the other hand, the active use of the concept of "personality" by church orthodoxy as a positive characteristic of the absolute divine being, as a designation of one of its perfections. Thus, the idea of the Absolute as the supreme First Principle of everything was gradually replaced, on the one hand, by the idea of faceless God–filled existence, and on the other, by the personality of God, who creates and freely participates in the existence of the world.

Classical German philosophy revealed the heyday of pantheistic developments of the idea of the absolute in history. Starting with Fichte, in this branch of European thought, the Absolute is understood either as a subject, as an object, or as their unity. In his interpretation of the Absolute, Fichte denies his personal form of being, despite the fact that he understands him as the absolute subject of the "I". Schleiermacher's God is beyond and above all opposites and definiteness: "To seek and find this eternal and infinite in everything that lives and moves, in every growth and change, in every action, suffering, and to have and know life itself in direct feeling, only as such a being in the infinite and eternal – that's What is religion? She is satisfied when she finds this existence; where the latter is hidden, there is for her an obstacle and anxiety, need and death. And therefore, of course, it is life in the infinite nature of the whole, in the all–one, in God, a life that possesses God in everything and everything in God" ^{[14, p. 43]}. This is perhaps the closest to the original Absolute and brings us back to Plato's Unity in accordance with the ancient tradition of the apophatic approach.

In Schelling, we also find the development of pantheistic ideas dating back to Spinoza: his subject-object or inner indifference of the ideal and the material resemble Spinoza's indefinite substance and Fichte's impersonal self. Schelling writes: "But the absolute cannot be reflected in either the finite or the infinite without expressing in each of them the full perfection of its essence; the unity of the finite and the infinite, reflected in the finite, manifests itself as being; reflected in the infinite, as activity; however, in the absolute it is neither one nor the other and does not appear in form. not in the form of the infinite, but in the form of eternity. For in the absolute everything is absolute; if, therefore, the perfection of its essence manifests itself in the real as infinite being, in the ideal as infinite cognition, then in the absolute both being and cognition are absolute, and since each of them is absolute, neither of them has opposites outside of itself, in the other, but the absolute cognition is the absolute essence, and the absolute essence is absolute cognition" ^{[15, p. 563]}

The concept of personality for German pantheistic idealists contradicts the concept of the absolute. And at the same time, it deprives the Absolute of its original absoluteness as the highest First Principle outside of being and regardless of being. There is a problem with the very application of the term Absolute in its traditional sense to a pantheistically understood God.

Hegel's absolute idea also resembles Spinoza's substance, with the difference that the Hegelian understanding asserts the process of dialectical development of an idea, the eternal movement of thought, the separation and union of opposites, which are realized in the form of a conditionally phenomenal being. For Hegel, the true Absolute is Spirit, a living substance that has as its content the process of its own unfolding as a sequential movement from the extremely abstract to the extremely concrete. "As a substance and universal, self-equal, permanent essence, spirit is the unchangeable and unshakable basis and starting point of the action of all and their ultimate goal as the mental "in itself" of all self-consciousnesses. In the same way, this substance is a universal product, which is created by the action of all and everyone as their unity and equality, for it is being, self, and action for itself. As a substance, spirit is an unshakeable, just equality to itself, but as a being for itself, this substance is a dissolved, self-sacrificing, merciful essence in which everyone. he carries out his own work, tears apart universal existence and takes his share of it for himself. This dissolution and separation of essence is precisely the moment of the action and self of all; therein lies the movement and soul of substance and the actuated universal essence. Precisely because it is a being dissolved in the self, it is not a dead entity, but is real and full of life. The Spirit, therefore, is a self-sustaining absolute real entity." ^{[16, pp. 234-235]}. From our point of view, in the Hegelian concept of the Absolute there is a contradiction between the obvious attempts to simultaneously pursue the logic of personalism and a-personalism. Hegel reduces the Absolute to both a personality (subject) and a pantheistic self-developing idea (Providence), adding to this the aspect of world conditioning, which again raises the problem of the "non-absoluteness" of the Absolute.

In this context, a special place is occupied by Kant, who says that the "absolutely unconditional" cannot be the subject of experimental research. Kant was of great importance for rethinking the interpretation of the Absolute, which was classical for European philosophy, shifting the issue from the field of ontology to the field of epistemology, which led to well-known historical and philosophical consequences.: "The problem with the philosophical absolute is that after I. Kant it turns out to be non-existent, it turns out to be a transcendental idea that cannot be given in contemplation, and therefore the question of its existence or non-existence turns out to be unsolvable" ^[17].

As a result, the process of ontological "emasculation" of the concept of the Absolute in an attempt to combine contradictory intentions of understanding leads to the situation of the "death of God" in modern philosophy. But despite the growth of non-classical ontologies that take into account the problems of the classical concepts we have analyzed, and despite the development of deconstructivist conceptualization of the Absolute in recent times, attempts to qualitatively rethink the historical and philosophical errors of the past are also not free from shortcomings.

As the historical and philosophical review presented by us shows, in essence, the classical European developments of the Absolute in the post-antique period are attempts to solve the problems of theistic understanding within the framework of an equally problematic pantheistic idea, then back and so on indefinitely (or rather, to a general philosophical "fatigue" from the cycle of this problem and to the creation of favorable conditions to reduce God to the level of just a problematic idea and, as a result, the rise of atheism, nihilism and postmodernism).

We will also outline some aspects of the latest criticism of the classical development of the Absolute in order to highlight more clearly the features of our critical approach.

Already during the heyday of absolute idealism, critics of the idealistic concept of the Absolute appeared in German thought (A. Schopenhauer, F. K. Baader, S. Kierkegaard, K. Marx). L. Feuerbach declares that man's own essence is his absolute essence, his God. Criticism of absolute idealism begins from the standpoint of atheistic materialism, existentialism, coupled with phenomenology, and is subsequently complemented by criticism from the standpoint of postmodernism.

In modern philosophy, we find an anthropological bias in the interpretation of the Absolute. Thus, Husserl, rejecting traditional idealistic ideas about the Absolute, nevertheless writes about "timeless absolute consciousness", about "absolute subjectivity" and "absolute flow". For Husserl, the world is a correlate of absolute consciousness, and reality is an index of the basic configurations of consciousness: "All objectivities are "appearances" in a specific sense, namely, the unity of thought, the unity of diversity, which in turn (as consciousness) form the absolute, in which all objectivities are constituted"^[18].

In Heidegger's philosophy, Dasein acts as the Absolute: "This is an entity that we ourselves always are and which, among other things, has the existential possibility of asking, we terminologically grasp as presence (Dasein)" ^{[19, p. 7]}. Philosophical poststructuralism liberates from the power of the absolute. So, in the concept of J. Derrida Center (absolute) He does not appear to a person, but shows only traces of his absence. The universe, devoid of an ontological basis, turns into a purely phenomenal world. The very idea of absolute truth, which has traditionally been assimilated to God the Absolute, ceases to be relevant in postmodernity.

3. Historical and philosophical review, continued: The experience of procedural interpretation of the Absolute.

Intuitionism and Bergson's philosophy of life were one of the lines of cardinal rethinking of classical idealistic ideas about the absolute. From the point of view of the thinker, since the ancient period of the development of European philosophy, there has been a "lurch" in the absolutization of the immobile as the most authentic: "The basis of ancient philosophy is, of necessity, the following postulate: the immobile contains something more than the moving, and from immutability to becoming one moves by reducing or weakening" ^{[20, p. 303.]}. In contrast, Bergson argues that time and temporal change are the most important and obligatory characteristics of the absolute, its essential definitions. Time is inherent in the temporal, that is, the finite, thus the absolute appears as the finiteness of existence, the end of which is the end of the world without resurrection. Bergson creates non-classical metaphysics, which gives us an unusual image of the Absolute as continuously generating a new content that has never existed before.

Bergson argues that the evolutionary process, in particular, the evolution of organic matter, is the result of the activity of the Spirit. God emanates a Spirit from himself, which, depending on the type of consideration, the philosopher calls either a "vital impulse", a Superconsciousness, or a Will. It is obvious that God here again descends from the level of absoluteness, since he has a will (which automatically activates the mode of ontological limitation), with which he emanates the Spirit. In its development, life always faces the opposition of inert matter, therefore, deviations, delays, stagnation and rollback are observed in its movement. However, evolution needs matter: the life impulse plunges into materiality, in order to be released from it with greater force. Consciousness, in its movement through earthly matter, is preparing for an even more intense and active life. In a person, consciousness concentrates and activates to such an extent that it ceases to be dependent on the body. Here we fix the problem of the correct correlation of spirit and matter in their ontological difference. If spirit interacts with matter, then they are of the same nature. The immersion of Spirit into matter is possible only if both principles can interact, but then it is impossible to separate God, Spirit and matter.: in this case, they are one thing.

Anyway, in the twentieth century, the Absolute is understood, thanks to Bergson and some other thinkers, precisely as creative, becoming and alive. When talking about the possibilities of the procedural interpretation of the Absolute, one cannot ignore the so-called "theology of the process" ^[21]. Process theism usually refers to a family of theological ideas that originated, inspired by, or consistent with the metaphysical orientation of the English mathematical philosopher Alfred North Whitehead (1861-1947) and the American philosopher Charles Hartshorn (1897-2000). For both Whitehead and Hartshorn, being fully involved in and influenced by temporal processes is an essential attribute of God. The Absolute thus ceases to be the primary basis of everything: if God perceives the activity of a creature and accepts it into himself, he changes and ceases to be what he should be, based on his very name, that is, God, and even more so, the Absolute. This is a universal problem of all later conceptualizations of the Absolute, which try to overcome the difficulties of classical developments based on the primacy of the "unchangeable", by assimilating the ontological priority of the changing.

It is worth saying that procedural theology can be perceived as a special case of a more general philosophical position – the philosophy of process ^[22]: "The philosophy of process in its modern understanding is a relatively recent phenomenon and is associated primarily with the philosophical systems of A.N. Whitehead and Ch. Hartshorn, who used it to develop procedural versions of panentheism. The emergence of procedural philosophy in this narrow sense is connected precisely with the crisis of classical metaphysics that occurred in the twentieth century" ^[23].

And finally, since all these new trends, for all their originality and recognition, seem controversial to us precisely from the point of view of the Absolute as the Single First Principle of everything, the authors prefer to return to the classical understanding of the Absolute in order to deduce the sought-after personality and processuality of God from the classical Absolute itself, and to prove that reality can stand behind the processuality of God. in the regime of ontological metaphysics, rather than speculative systems that assign the category of absoluteness to such obviously unreliable and unstable temporary mortal beings as the human individual, the observable universe and a changeable finite being that has a beginning, as a result of which there must necessarily be an end.

4. A return to the positive disclosure of the classical ontology of the Absolute.

Let us now return to the classical understanding of the Absolute as an ontological First Principle: such an Absolute appears to be absolute in everything.:

1) He and he alone exists, and there is nothing besides him, unless created or generated by him from himself, or from nothing, or by himself, or by his creatures.

2) Secondly, he is everywhere and nowhere, because there is no "where" in which he would be, there is nothing outside of him or even inside him, he is the only one, both inside and outside, one, indivisible, completely identical to his parts, that is, there are no parts having, entirely, entirely, by himself.

3) Naturally, the Absolute is self–sufficient, self-satisfied and self-satisfied, has no needs and lacks nothing, because if it were, it would mean that the Absolute is not him, but he plus what he lacks.

4) He does not have an actively functioning mind, because he has nothing to think about and cares about, he already has the fullness of everything.

5) He has no will, because he does not have what he wants, being the fullness of everything.

6) He has no life, because he does not need it, being himself the source of life.

7) He is not a person at all, an infinite, boundless essence that is not aware and does not know himself, which is the First Principle and the first cause of everything, the foundation of which he is the foundation of the existence and non-existence of everything-everything that exists and does not exist, ideal and material, conceivable and inconceivable – everything that is, was and will be and what is not it was not and will not be. He is everything for everything except himself, which he does not think or realize, and therefore does not exist for himself.

8) It does not change in any way, even the smallest, since any changes indicate the non-absolute nature of what happened before the changes.

9) It is not procedural, no processes are possible in it, as they would immediately lead to changes that are unacceptable.

If we summarize all the above standard characteristics, we are faced with complete static: such an Absolute, even if it is the First Principle, the origin and foundation of all that exists, can in no way be the creator of the world, nor the originator of other gods and non-gods, nor the manifestation of being and himself in it, as well as all that exists. In other words, if there is such a god, then for our world he does not exist, he does not exist, he is Nothing, and the world cannot owe its existence to him in any way, such a God cannot leave his absoluteness, because he cannot want to; he is dead and will not rise again. Moreover, he does not exist for himself either – this is an ontological dead end from which a satisfactory way out has never been found. As a result, postmodernists and their processualist followers had to abandon the ontology of the Absolute and metaphysics as such altogether: if there is no satisfactory solution, then it is easier than to admit it, to pretend that the problem itself does not exist - in favor of ideas declared triumphant novelty by their authors and sympathizers, but which, upon closer examination, are more They are similar to playing with words and their meanings, and to original private opinions on everyday issues, rather than searching for answers to the most important questions of philosophy in a world-wide setting without diving into the particular personal being of mortal individuals. Those who are prevented from becoming gods themselves by their timelessness and mortality, their sudden disappearance from being, the gods and progenitors of which they have appointed themselves.

Let's not go into the ontology of Nothing, because it considers ourselves to be complete non–existence, an illusion - whose illusion is it if we ourselves are this illusion? The mind is not ready to accept this: "I think, so I exist." According to the principle of reciprocity, the world itself must deny existence to those who denied existence to the world, which was achieved in various modifications of the philosophy of postmodernism.

Traditional solutions to this issue (creation from nothing, emanation into nothing, creation of the world from pre-existing matter and the spread of an abundance of wealth beyond oneself to nowhere) over the past millennia of numerous conceptual developments have demonstrated the impossibility of circumventing the fundamental problems of classical philosophical cosmogony and cosmology. Moreover, the centuries-old concepts of understanding how the Absolute and the world relate come into conflict with the objective data of modern science and therefore need to be revised, which will be effective if we go beyond the philosophical schematization of this issue, sanctified by the authority of antiquity.

5. On the question of possible sources of knowledge about the Absolute.

Let us ask ourselves how and from where we can learn at least something about the Incomprehensible, is there at least some reliable source of knowledge about God, about his very nature, essence, or, according to the definition of Cappadocian theology, about the "logos of divine nature"?

The authors believe that it is Jesus' lifetime sermon about the Father, whom Jesus repeatedly defines as "one" with himself, that perhaps contains the only reliable information about God.

From the point of view of the authors, the main thing in Jesus' sermon about the Father is that Jesus "revealed" God (John 1:18 "No one has ever seen God; the only begotten Son, who exists in the bosom of the Father, He revealed"), as a Father who gives birth to his children and cares for them with love and care, that it does not fit at all with the idea of the Absolute, the dispassionate, weak-willed Nothing of the First Principle, which does not know itself.

The way out of this apparent impasse is to recognize God as a rational and thinking Person, which has already been repeatedly implemented in religious and philosophical concepts, as we have seen above. But then, unlike those who, recognizing God as a person, did not bother to substantiate this assumption, we will have to go through the path of development together with the Absolute, paradoxically as it sounds, from the absolute Super-Nothing to the Heavenly Father revealed by Jesus. That is, to discover in the ontology of the Absolute the very processality for which modern philosophy had to deny the Absolute itself its absoluteness, presenting it, in particular, as a simple set of human personalities present in existence. In the authors' own concept of a new ontological perspective ^{[3, 4]}, the need to abandon ontological metaphysics simply disappears as unnecessary.

6. The author's concept of divinity in the light of a new ontological perspective.

The proposed concept is based on an analysis of the methodological foundations of both apophatic and cataphatic theology in the context of the epistemology of the Divine. Both approaches, while not mutually exclusive, are, in fact, a method of analogy, since cognition, limited by the limits of the human mind, has no other tools for apperception of the transcendent, except for comparison with well-known categories of its own experience. Consequently, the primary task is to determine the essence and ontogenesis of the human mind, followed by the projection of the revealed characteristics onto the Divine substance. This approach is, to a certain extent, epistemologically justified, based on the assumption of the world as a reflection of God, created in His image and likeness (as the only possible option). However, it is necessary to note the recursive nature of this process: the world, in turn, generates anthropomorphic representations of the divine, which may also indicate an indirect two-way interaction between the Creator and creation.

Thus, the central issue becomes: what is the mind and what is its genesis?

Leaving aside trivial explanations, such as the divine origin of the mind, and turning to the evolutionary approach, it can be stated that the most universal property of all existing objects is resistance to change. In inanimate nature, this property manifests itself in passivity, requiring overcoming inertia and energy expenditure for any change in state. Differentiation between living and inanimate can be carried out based on the nature of the reaction to external influences: inanimate matter is characterized by the principle of equality of action and reaction, showing resistance to changes in its state. Living matter, unlike inanimate matter, demonstrates an active desire to avoid adverse effects, which can be considered as the development of the ability to self-preservation. This transition is characterized by the emergence of a boundary between the subject who recognizes himself as "I" and the outside world, which is seen as a potential threat seeking to absorb and assimilate the subject, overcoming the boundary of self-identification.

Let's consider the evolutionary aspects of the emergence of the mind, using examples from the biological world. A virus, which is not a living organism in the conventional sense, is a self-replicating biological mechanism that functions through the use of environmental resources. Changes in its genome are mostly random and are not the result of purposeful evolution aimed at self-preservation. Moreover, high virulence, which leads to the death of the host, also leads to the death of the virus itself. As a result of natural selection, less aggressive strains survive, ensuring the coevolution of the virus and the host, which leads to a decrease in the pathogenicity of the virus over time.

Unlike a virus, a cell surrounded by a plasma membrane has mechanisms for perceiving external influences. Damage to the cell membrane signals danger, triggering the activation of protective mechanisms aimed at self-preservation. This reaction can be interpreted as a manifestation of fear, a signaling system based on the differentiation of "one's own" (cells) and "someone else's" (external environment), limited by the cell membrane. This is a primitive form of self-awareness that originates at the initial stage of evolution. Thus, it can be hypothesized that the emergence of reason is associated with a self-preservation reaction caused by awareness of one's own identity and separation from a potentially hostile environment.

The further evolution of the mind, despite its increasing complexity, retains its essence as a reaction to external stimuli. The primary reaction that ensures self-preservation and, therefore, is the foundation for the development of reason, is the reaction of fear. Therefore, it can be argued that fear is a causal factor in the emergence and development of reason in the process of evolution of living organisms. This initial reaction to danger served as the basis for the emergence of more complex cognitive functions and behaviors aimed at ensuring survival and procreation.

The proposed analogy, which transfers the model of the emergence of reason to the Absolute, presupposes the initial state of the Absolute as an impersonal, unconscious, mindless, weak–willed and non-self-conscious First Principle, completely absorbed in its own absoluteness - a state equivalent to Nothing in relation to the external world (which, in this context, also does not exist). The question arises: what factor could cause the "awakening" of the Absolute from this state of eternal self-absorption?

Let us turn to Plato's dialogue "Parmenides", where the One Superbeing is opposed by absolute Nothingness, which paradoxically must be immanent to the Absolute as the idea of its own non-existence. According to the hypotheses of "Parmenides", a Single Superbeing (our Absolute) is in a superposition of two parallel states: being and non-being, conditioned by his absolute freedom. The only alternative to the Absolute is Nothing, a complete denial of its existence, disappearing into absolute nothingness.

The transition from superposition to one particular of the two "virtual" states is possible only through self-knowledge, achieved through reflection in the "other", that is, into Nothing. This reflection, which is a double negation of the Super-Being itself, identifies it as distinct from its own non-existence, thereby establishing its being. This process does not involve a volitional act on the part of the Absolute, but is a self-organizing system of mutual reflections, similar to a system of two parallel flat mirrors, generating an endless perspective of their own reflections. This system, without any external necessity, generates many things from a Single world, starting with the Absolute itself, which knows itself in its reflections. "There is no volitional act on the part of the Absolute, but only a reflection of one in the other, of the Absolute in the other, and of the other in it, like a system of two parallel mirrors that create an endless perspective of their own mutual reflections in each other, the very world of many other things that multiplies not because it wants to, but because it can" ^[4].

Thus, recognizing oneself in one's own reflection, in the perspective of one's own disappearance, generates Reason in the Absolute. The fear of non-existence, of one's own disappearance, acts as a catalyst for awareness of one's own being and, as a result, the "awakening" of the Absolute. In this context, the analogy turns out to be justified: the Super-Being acquires intelligence, self-awareness and personality due to the fear of its own non-being, and this fear arises not because of an external threat that does not exist and cannot exist, but comes, as a result, from the very freedom of the Super-Being "to be or not to be", already contained in to yourself, like everything else, your own non-existence.

The Gnostic tradition, in particular, the Gospel of Truth, partially touches on aspects relevant to the proposed concept. His text describes the state before creation, where everything resides in the incomprehensible, inconceivable and transcendent Absolute. Ignorance of the Father (the Absolute) by his creatures is described as "fright and fear," which, materializing like a fog separating creatures from the Creator, generates delusion and false creation. "Because everything was looking for the One from whom it came, and everything was inside Him, incomprehensible, inconceivable, beyond all thought, ignorance of the Father became fear and fear. The fright became dense, like a fog, so that no one could see. Therefore, it gained strength, delusion, it worked on its substance in the void. Without knowing the truth, it appeared in creation, preparing in power (and) beauty a substitute for the truth. And this was not humiliation for Him, incomprehensible, unthinkable, for it was nothing - fright, and oblivion, and the creation of lies, but the constant truth is unchangeable, unflappable, unvarnished" ^[24]. It is important to note that fear here does not act as an emotion, but as an ontologically necessary component of the process of the "exit" of the Absolute from the state of transcendence. This coincides with our concept, where the fear of non-existence is an impulse to self-knowledge and transition to being.

Continuing the presentation of the concept, we note the transition from the static First Principle (Absolute-Nothing) to the self-conscious Absolute-being, which corresponds to the Neoplatonic second ontological level (Mind). However, unlike Neoplatonism, this newborn God does not reside in our existence, but in his own Super-Existence, which arose as the descent of the Absolute from Super-Existence into a new state of being accessible only to him.

In this Super-Existence, God sees himself as Super-Existent, surrounded by a fog of infinite and boundless Super-Being, as yet unknown in its entirety. The process of self-knowledge begins, anticipated by Eriugena ^[8]: the Deity seeks to know himself, and the infinity and unknowability of the Absolute lead to the infinity of the process of his own self-knowledge. This endless reflexive process is a key element of the presented model, distinguishing it from static representations of the Deity in other philosophical systems. Self-knowledge becomes not an end point, but a continuous process, the driving force of which is the immanent potential of the absolute, constantly unfolding in its own Superbeing.

The first stage of self-knowledge of the Absolute is to determine one's own self-awareness: "who am I, where am I, and what surrounds me?". In the initial state of the process of self-knowledge, the Absolute Being resides within himself, and his surroundings are also his essence, as yet unknown. Thus, the act of creating the world becomes simultaneously an act of self-knowledge and theophany. The absolute sets boundaries by appropriating a name for itself, an act of self–limitation that separates self-awareness from infinity. The appearance of the name gives rise to the idea of a "mirror-in-itself" in which the Super-Existent can examine himself and observe himself within the limits of his Super-Existence limited by his name.

The process of self-knowledge and self-limitation through the names of God develops endlessly. Having defined itself by a name, the Absolute continues to expand into namelessness, appropriating new names for itself as self-perception expands. Each name represents a stage of private self-knowledge, first of the Absolute, which is Super-existent, limiting itself, and then transcending its own boundaries and re-cognizing itself within new boundaries. Thus, God appears as a process, not a stasis, and the worlds as the product of a system of mirrors in which God contemplates himself.

Thus, in the second stage, we have reached the Aristotelian understanding of God as an entity focused on self-contemplation.: "Aristotle's God thinks only of Himself," and "is personally not concerned with the fate of the world or even the very fact of its eternal existence near and in connection with it" ^[7]. This corresponds to the stage of development of self-knowledge of the Absolute, where the emphasis is on self-reflection, within the framework of a self-limited Superbeing.

The third step is the transformation of the impersonal Absolute, the First Principle, into the Heavenly Father, as he is represented in the Christian tradition. This transition requires further consideration and explanation of the mechanisms of transition from pure self-contemplation to personal interaction with creation, to the manifestation of love and care for the created world. This transformation presupposes a further development of the concept that goes beyond pure self-knowledge and includes aspects of God's existential process in the form of compassion, altruism and participation in the destinies of creation.

The super–existent God, who generates worlds as mirrors in order to look into them, is full of self–satisfaction and self-sufficiency, being carried away by the process of self-knowledge, which is endless - and therefore he infinitely does not care about what happens in the worlds he generates: their Givens are responsible for them ^{[3, 25]}, or Providences - ideas contained in the appropriated Super-Existences Names for themselves as they develop their own self-knowledge. That is, having appropriated another Name to himself in self–knowledge, as the idea of the world, and thereby creating its Reality, God, "finished on the seventh day His works that He had done, and rested on the seventh day from all His works that He had done" (Gen 2:2) - for the world, he has not yet It exists. And the world develops according to the providence of Reality, which also, by analogy with the Absolute, the First Principle, from its static superposition with its disappearance through a double reflection of itself into itself from its non-existence, gave rise to the existence of Providence, that is, our world, as a tape of instant snapshots unfolding in time of the reality of the existence of the observable universe in a position of complete predestination according to the smallest a detailed plan of Providence for him, originally already contained by God in his own Name, assigned by him to this world. All beings in this world appear as puppets acting according to a predetermined plan that excludes freedom of choice: there can be no question of any freedom of choice in the world of cause-and–effect predestination, there is no place for choice in the "one cause-one effect" pair.

This order is maintained until the Mind appears, which begins to search for God. Initially, God-seeking serves as a tool of protection from incomprehensible and menacing phenomena. However, later, this process becomes more complicated, inevitably leading to the formation of the idea of God as a patron.

Man's conversion to God does not go unanswered, and this happens again in a way that is already familiar to us, namely through the superposition of God's existence in the human mind (God is|There is no God): until this dilemma arises in the human mind, God does not manifest in the existence of the world, which in itself does not interest him in the least. However, in his own mind, man acts as an observer of the divine superposition, and it is he who, as an observer, determines only in his mind whether there is a God or not. In this way, God, the Spirit, who is transcendent to the world, finds existence in it not just anywhere, but solely in the mind of a person for whom one has God, and for the other there is no God. The human mind determines God's exit from the superposition of Super-being-non-existence into the certainty of one of two possible states of God in the existence of the world: either God exists, or there is no God. And for those for whom He exists, God becomes a truly caring Father to those who invited Him into the existence of the world in their minds – and, according to Jesus, were mutually born again, and thus taken into the Kingdom of the Father by an immortal soul, which is the reverse reflection of a person's personality from the earthly world to the Kingdom of Heaven.

Conclusion.

As a result of the analysis, from the emotionless and impersonal Absolute in three steps from the first (the One is the Absolute) up to the third (Soul) of the corresponding otological levels of Neoplatonism, a personal God is generated, capable of experiencing fear, pain, death, as well as empathy and love – a true Father to his children. God's genuine compassion is shown in response to the appeal of his children, who call out to him, "Abba, Father" (Galatians 4:6). According to the Gospel, God rushes to meet his children, taking them "into His shelter" (Luke 16:9). These children, born again (as described in John 3:5) and given immortal souls in the Father's Kingdom, represent the reverse reflection of their minds into a divine Super-Existence. They move from the earthly world to the Kingdom of Heaven and turn to the Father with requests for sympathy for those who are dear to them in the "raging world." In response to these requests, God intervenes in his own Providence, changing it – and then an ordinary miracle occurs in the world. This position of the concept proposed by the authors is quite consistent with the concept of the "dynamic" Absolute: God takes into himself the sympathy, pity and love of his born–again children as their co-creation in the development of the world - and thereby, changing his Providence about the world, which is a reflection of himself, and he himself changes, enriched by the love created by people and through she's improving. Thus, the "mechanism" of God's processability described by the authors correlates with the concept of "process theism" by Whitehead and Hardscorn, where God is in constant interaction with his creation, changing and developing under the influence of this interaction. God is not a static and unchangeable, but a dynamic and process-based entity that participates in the life of the world and transforms itself under the influence of love and compassion, improving in its perfection.

In conclusion, the authors believe that the task set — to comprehend the ontological descent of Absolute stasis into the existence of the world as God the Father, preached by Jesus - has been largely completed. They presented a concept explaining this transition through the mechanisms of self-knowledge of the Absolute, interaction with the created world and the evolution of Divine consciousness under the influence of human reason and love.

The construction of a new ontological perspective in solving the aporia of transcendence with the resulting possibility of explaining the "mechanism" of God's intervention in the existence of the world through Providence, the proposed solution to the difficulty in the field of free will and predestination, as well as the "generation" of God's presence in the existence of the world through the mind of a believer are, from the point of view of the authors, significant scientific novelty, which may be of interest to the entire scientific and philosophical community.