The Sacred as a necessary condition of a symbol in the context of A. F. Losev's dialectical and henological approach

The subject of the study is the sacred and its role in the formation of a symbol in the context of A. F. Losev's dialectical-henological approach. The authors rely on dialectical henology (the doctrine of the One) Losev's theory, developed in the theory of "the very itself" as the non-predicate basis of any thing. Such a non-predicate basis of all things and the world as a whole ("the very itself"), according to the authors, appears in the archaic consciousness and culture as sacred. Based on the analysis of sources, the article compares the ideas of the sacred in culture and the dialectic of "the very itself". According to Losev, "the very itself" cannot be identified with an unknowable thing-in-itself, but is a source of meaningful and non-meaningful in a thing and is expressed in symbols of a specific individuality. Any sign is a symbol if it has two dimensions and has both transitive and non-transitive sides. As a symbol, on the one hand, it shows the indivisible existence of the One (meanings), and, on the other hand, it expresses an undifferentiated continuous One (sacred). There are two main approaches in the history of philosophy, going back to Plato and Aristotle. In the Neoplatonic approach, the symbol is understood as the unity of transitivity and non-transitivity. The latter is associated with the expression of the transcendent in the immanent. In the Aristotelian approach, developed in the rationalist tradition, transitivity is emphasized in the symbol. Comparative historical, dialectical methods and the method of typologization are used. Based on Losev's dialectical methodology, the conclusion is made about the greatest completeness of the dialectically specific theory of the symbol. On this basis, the specificity of the human essence, which is irreducible to robotic rationalism or to bestial irrationalism, is comprehended. The example of archaic cultural practices shows symbolism, the two-dimensional nature of human nature. The profane in culture is quite transitive, the sacred is non–transitive. The symbol connects these two spheres, forms transitions from one to the other. The novelty of the work lies in the application of A.F. Losev's dialectical-henological theory of the symbol to the study of the sacred and the two-dimensional nature of both the symbol and the human essence. The transitivity and non-transitivity of the symbol are shown in their dialectical unity, which makes it possible to connect, without mixing or dissolving one into the other, the sacred and profane sides of cultural life.