Reading Bulgakov's The Master and Margarita from the Perspective of Hinduism
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Mikhail Bulgakov's The Master and Margarita (1966-67)(1) has been praised highly for both its literary merit and its spiritual significance. Many critical studies explain complex nature of interrelationship between natural and supernatural in novel. The unexpected roles that otherworldly beings play in novel, resulting satire, and fantastic in plot create a certain inevitable puzzlement about structure and meaning of novel. Attempts to explain implications of spiritual elements underpinning fantastic span through various belief systems, but given complexity of Bulgakov's novel, a coherent, conclusive explanation has been elusive. Central to my reading of Bulgakov's novel is recognition that divinity's presence in The Master and Margarita is more complex than its apparent Christian representation. This reading draws upon an older religious tradition, namely, Hindu system of belief, to establish correspondences between Hindu images of God and Bulgakov's portrayal of otherworldly entities. Because these correspondences are scattered across a variety of Hindu myths and beliefs, it is difficult to draw a coherent picture and claim that Bulgakov based his fictional divinity on any specific Hindu system. However, various ancient beliefs of Hinduism can be seen to illumine relationship between different worlds that are brought together, role of God and devil, and nature of divine intervention in lives of ordinary mortals in Bulgakov's novel. I will restrict myself to portrayal of devil, Master, and Margarita, whom I will compare to relevant images from Hindu mythology. Hinduism offers much potential for such an exploration through its myths and legends. In Hindu mythology, God is incarnated in this world in different forms, at different times, and for different purposes.(2) Hindus firmly believe God's declaration that he will manifest himself whenever forces of evil threaten to destroy positive human virtues. Similar to Hinduism, other religions have also offered a means of closing distance between man and God by admitting various celestial beings such as demi-gods, angels, saints, and others. In Hinduism and Christianity, is a common belief that there has been a divine descent through which God has sent his surrogate to earth and graced us with His presence in a being known as God-man.(3) In Christianity incarnation is Jesus Christ, as both human and divine, while in Hinduism there are several such incarnations. Following this prototype, at very beginning of Bulgakov's novel, divine incarnation that appears in Moscow is a devil. This devil, Woland, fulfilling a role similar to that of God-man in mythology, takes it upon himself to expose moral degradation of 1930s Moscow. Bulgakov's depiction of devil contains unmistakable allusions to, and echoes of, not only Christianity, but also other ancient, pre-Christian systems of belief and their gods. Woland, who has been shown to exhibit traits not only of Christian devil, but also of pre-Christian gods,(4) is reminiscent of messengers of God and intermediate beings who moved between heaven and earth upon his service in ancient, pre-Christian religions.(5) There have been many attempts to explain Woland's role in Moscow and Pontius Pilate's in Jerusalem in novel through Old and New Testaments, apocryphal texts, and Rabbinical literature, including ancient Middle Eastern mythology. In this context, it has been observed that although novel is profoundly religious,(6) the variety of critical commentaries has already shown impossibility of reducing Bulgakov's novel to one single interpretation.(7) It is clear that novel's spiritual conception is broader than that of Christianity.(8) Bulgakov is a religious writer, but question of which religious view of life and world he adhered to, remains unanswered. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».