The idea of equality in the Russian freemasonry came from the Gospel idea of the universal equality in front of the Lord
dr. Roxolana Zigon
The origins of the Russian freemasonry go back to the XVIII century, the blooming height of the Enlightenment ideas. At different times, freemasons were persecuted (as under Catherine the Great) or were under the patronage of the monarch’s authority (as under the Freemason Alexander I).
It should be noted the general, distinctive features of Russian freemasonry.
In general, the distinctive features of the Russian freemasonry should be noted here. Russian freemasonry was not anti-religious and, in particular, anti-Orthodox. According to Berdyaev: “Russian Masons were looking for a true Christianity. And it is heart-warming to see how Russian Masons were eager throughout stream of time to check whether it was anything hostile to Christianity and Orthodoxy within philosophy of the freemasonry.”
Russian Masons did not deny Christianity and Orthodoxy, considering religion as an opportunity to achieve universal equality. Also, freemasonry did not aim at achieving a universal equality by overthrowing the monarchy. The idea of equality in Russian Freemasonry did not come from the idea of the natural rights, as it was in Europe, but from the Gospel idea of the universal equality in front of the Lord.
Thus, one of the key features of the Russian Freemasonry was its ethical and religious orientation.
The Russian Freemasonry was also the ground for the national liberalism ideas formation. In many ways, it influenced the difference between Russian and European liberalism. European liberalism has in its foundation utilitarianism and, in particular, the theory of the “social contract” of the Freemason John Locke. The ideology of the European Freemasonry was connected with the idea of the natural rights, whereas the right to freedom is emphasized as the most important of them. Russian liberalism proceeded not from the idea of the individual freedom, but from the idea of expanding universal human rights. While the European liberalism was based on the idea of freedom as a key philosophical seed, the Russian liberalism nourished equality as a grounding idea. Therefore, the national liberalism, to a greater extent, can be called as an “ethical liberalism”, which is aimed at building an ideal society based on the principles of equality and justice.
Russian Freemasonry Abroad
The tree of knowledge of the Russian Freemasonry was fertile not only on the Russian soil, but also outside its maternal midst. Russian Freemasonry abroad is represented by the Russian Masons and Masonic lodges that appeared outside of Russia and became for various reasons (bans, revolutions, persecution of the authorities) self-sufficient phenomenon. The process of formation of this powerful foreign branch of Russian Freemasonry began at the end of the XIX century.
A more detailed information about Russian Freemasons, who moved in the foreign lodges, belong to the period of 1870–1880s.
Grigory Nikolaevich Vyrubov (1843–1913) in the early 1870s was admitted to the lodge of the “Grand Orient of France” “Mutual Aid”.
The inventor of the electric light bulb Pavel Nikolaevich Yablochkov (1847–1894) in 1881 was admitted to the lodge “Labor and Faithful Friends of Truth” of the Supreme Council of the Old Scottish Rite, later, in 1887, created with other Russian Masons, who also lived in Paris, the lodge “Cosmos”. Pavel Nikolaevich wanted to turn the lodge “Cosmos” into an elitist lodge, uniting in its ranks the best representatives of the Russian emigration in the field of science, literature and art. However, after the death of Pavel Nikolaevich, the lodge created by him stopped its work for some time. It managed to resume its activities only in 1899. The total number of the lodges for the entire period of its existence amounted to 40 Masons.
A pleiad of prominent Freemasons of the Russian Abroad includes the psychiatrist
Nikolai Nikolaevich Bazhenov (1857–1923) – “United Friends” lodge (1884).
The exact date of the initiation of the professor of sociology Maxim Maximovich Kovalevsky (1851–1916) is unknown; most likely, it could have been between 1887 and 1890. According to those who knew the professor well, he was a typical Russian barin. Good and kind, intelligent and liberal. Dismissed from Moscow University for preaching constitutional ideas in his lectures, M. M. Kovalevsky spent many years abroad, met there with Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, and was one of the founders of the International Sociological Institute. On November 14, 1901, thanks mainly to his efforts and under the control of the lodge “Cosmos” in Paris there was opened the Russian Higher School of Social Sciences, which operated until 1904.
Eugene Valentinovich De Roberti (1843–1915), nobleman, descendant of the ancient Castilian family de Roberti de Castro de la Cerda. Eugene Valentinovich graduated from the Alexander Lyceum in St. Petersburg (1862), then studied at universities in Germany; Doctor of Philosophy (1864), one of the founders of the Russian Higher School of Social Sciences in Paris, where he read sociology (1901–1904), one of the initiators of the Psychoneurological Institute in St. Petersburg, where he also read sociology for the first time in Russia (1908–1915), professor at the New Brussels University (1894–1907). Freemason, from 1884 a member of the Paris Masonic lodge, from 1906 – of the Moscow lodge “Renaissance”, subordinate to the Masonic organization “Grand Orient of France”.
Nestor Alexandrovich Kotlyarevsky. His master’s thesis “World Sorrow in the European literature of the XIX century” is devoted to the analysis of the European thinkers’ reflections on the ideal man as the highest value and, undoubtedly, bears a clear imprint of its author’s fascination with Freemasonry.
Grigory Vyrubov and positivism philosophy
One of the most prominent Freemasons of the Russian abroad was the Russian-French philosopher, sociologist and natural scientist Grigory Nikolaevich Vyrubov (1843–1913). He studied at the Lycée Bonaparte in Paris (1855–1857), graduated with a gold medal from the Alexander Lyceum (1862), and from 1862 studied at the natural department of the Mathematics Faculty of Moscow University, where in 1864 he received the degree of Candidate of Natural Sciences. From 1865 he lived in France, becoming co-editor (with E. Littré) of the journal La Philosophie positive, in which his main works were published. In 1886 he defended his doctoral thesis at the Sorbonne, and from 1891 was a president of the Paris Mineralogical Society; after 1903 he held the chair of the history of science at the Collège de France. Having familiarized himself with positive philosophy at the Alexander Lyceum and imbued with a deep distrust of metaphysics and religion, Grigory Vyrubov became a convinced and consistent supporter of positivist Comte’s way [Auguste Comte (1798–1857), French philosopher, the founder of positivism and the founder of sociology as an independent science. – Ed. note], which he considered to be the only fully completed scientific system of philosophy. In the context of his scientific worldview, the positive conception of the world exists for a reason of coordinating the existing knowledge and to contribute to the acquisition of a new horizon of knowledge. He perceived the theory of cognition as a doctrine of the procedures of the intellect, which searches for the laws of the world and is, in its turn, not philosophy, but a special logic, which is a part of psychology and biology, studying man as a social animal.
During his first time abroad, he practiced medicine in Berlin and Paris, traveled extensively both in Europe and in the East. In Paris he became close friends with Emile Littré, with the widow of Auguste Comte and with the main positivists, in whose circle in 1867 the idea arose to found a periodical of positivism philosophy.
The first issue of Philosophie positive appeared on July 1, 1867, edited by Littré and Vyrubov. The journal was published until 1884 and served as the progenitor of a plenty of the scientific philosophy press. In 1873, Littré and Vyrubov’s journal received an honorary diploma at the World’s Fair in Vienna.
During the Franco-Prussian War (1870–1871), Vyrubov took part in the defence of Paris as a volunteer of the National Guard, mainly in the Red Cross marching infirmaries. During the Russo-Turkish War (1877–1878) he went to the Caucasus, where he was entrusted with the organization of campaign infirmaries in the Erivan detachment, which he was attached to at all times.
The first printed works of Grigory Nikolayevich appeared in 1866. After the publication of Philosophie positive was discontinued, he switched entirely to scientific activity. In 1889 he has naturalized in France (with the permission of the Russian government), was a member of all the leading Parisian scientific societies. He collaborated with a wide range of the Russian and foreign newspapers. His feuilletons appeared in the “St. Petersburg Vedomosti” by V. F. Korsh, and his correspondence from Paris – in the newspaper “Order”. He was close to A. I. Herzen, and in 1875–1879 published his complete works.
Vyrubov’s philosophical, journalistic and critical works are almost all written in French and appeared mostly in his journal. Collected, they would make up several volumes of a compact press.
Grigory Nikolaevich Vyrubov played a particularly important role in the formation of the Russian Freemasonry in France, being a vice-chairman of the council of the “Grand Orient of France” since 1885. Unfortunately, to date there is an extremely limited range of sources and materials in Russian language, which would allow to assess the full scale of the intellectual activity of Grigory Nikolaevich in the field of building the Masonic educational ground and discourse. Despite this, even those sources that are available, appear to be strikingly amazing with their exceptional sharpness and accuracy of judgments about Freemasonry and its role, ethics, philosophy, and ideology.
Thus, in one of his letters “From Parisian life. Masons f Paris” from the 4th of May 1872 Grigory Nikolaevich writes: “In the public spread the most inaccurate, the most bizarre concepts of Freemasonry. This is due, of course, to the mystery, however, much more conventional than actual, surrounding the so-called “Masonic work”. Some of the observers look at it with a terrible association in their minds, engaged in symbolic representations of a various kinds of horrible scenes; others, more knowledgeable, see in it a collection of people wasting their time in idle observance of ridiculous, unnecessary rituals. Some, finally, find in it a harmful tendency, tending to the destruction of all religion and all morality. In short, most treat it either maliciously or completely indifferent. Only Masons sympathize with Freemasonry, and at the same time, they belong to the most diverse parties, to the most diverse views”.
As a positivist philosopher, who is not inherently inclined to irrational and mystical interpretations of natural and social phenomena, Vyrubov gives a clear description of Freemasonry, removing the veil of mystery from it: “Freemasonry, at least here in France, does not represent something singular, a whole. It has no definite purpose, no definite doctrines, except those generalities about liberty and fraternity, which have lost all practical meaning since a long time ago. It is only an organization, a strict, deliberate, eminently complete organization, a ready-made frame, in which anything can be inserted. This organization is a model of perfection. Everything in it is methodically arranged, everything is stipulated, everything is calculated; it grips you completely and does not allow you to go beyond a known, strictly defined boundary. From the point of view of your beliefs and attitudes, you are given the fullest freedom; from the external, formal point of view, you are enslaved. And such is the power of this device, such is the influence of this complex mechanism, that the most desperate sceptics involuntarily submit to it. This is the whole benefit, the whole meaning of a good organization. The military system or the famous Jesuit order with its obedience is usually considered as a type of discipline; this is not fair. Freemasonry stands in this respect immeasurably above them, already due to the fact that discipline coexists with the most diverse religious and political concepts here. In our anarchic times this fact is quite remarkable. In fact, look around you: everywhere there isa sheer discord, hesitation, everywhere reigns scepticism towards laws and rules, even those established by ourselves. Freemasonry alone is a strange exception; it is dominated by “obedience,” and obedience to such statutes, the origin of which is lost almost in the darkness of the past centuries. This original peculiarity is easily explained. If you take away from Freemasonry its formalities, signs, its mystery, then it disappears completely, it turns at once into the most ordinary society of doing nothing, which are so many in the world. On the other hand, Masons understand very well that their association is useful, necessary even in the present order of things, hence it is more profitable to submit to seemingly absurd rules and customs. Such obedience becomes a habit and, little by little, it begins to seem that there can be no other rules and customs in Freemasonry”.
The influence of Grigory Vyrubov’s ideas on the Russian foreign Freemasonry in the late XIX – early XX centuries can be judged by the reflections and judgments that he shared with the readers in his letters and articles on the pages of “La Philosophie positive”: “For example, I am a positivist, and as such I look upon my philosophy as the height of the human wisdom, but I cannot, without deserving the reproach of naiveté, preach that everything that happens apart from Comte’s ideas is worthless? Well, what if suddenly society does not want to recognize the justice of these ideas? What would I say then? That this society is rotten, that it is destined to pass from the historical stage? You can say that, it’s worthless. The only thing is that it will serve no purpose, because society will still live and move, slowly, incorrectly, but it will move forward. Our business is not to rebuild the existing order according to a pre-determined program, but to study the numerous springs of the social mechanism and use those that are stronger than others. Going against the will of the majority – historical experience has repeatedly shown this – leads to nothing: a momentary victory, however brilliant it may be, is replaced by the old order, which is really changed not by any party or any revolution, but by the slow work of each and every one, by the gradual rise of the mental level”. [“French Socialists,” Paris, 1(13) November].
Unfortunately, after Grigory Nikolaevich Vyrubov passed away, which was announced in a brief note “The death of a Freemason” on the pages of the artistic and literary journal “Iskra”, No. 49 of 1913, the business of Russian Freemasons “to study the many springs of the social mechanism” got frozen for some time. However, the next turbulent round of its development came in the 20–30s of the XX century.
***
After the October Revolution of 1917 the masonic organizations in Russia were banned and freemasons were persecuted. As a consequence of which Russian lodges began to develop actively outside Russia. These lodges were: “Astrea” No. 500, “Northern Lights” No. 523, “Hermes” No. 535, “Golden Fleece” No. 536, “Jupiter” No. 536, “Prometheus” No. 558, “Gamayun” No. 624, “Lotus” No. 638. The total number of the Russian Masons in the Grand Lodge of France was 1571 people. The attitude to the Russian Freemasonry in emigration throughout the XX and early XI centuries changed dramatically under the influence of a various political ideologies and forces. However, despite the fluctuations in views on the role of Freemasonry, it remained an invariable intellectual and spiritual foundation for the Russian emigration, a resource for the formation of a wide diversity of the social groups seeking to unite and build a new Russian society abroad.
And no matter what kind of historical varieties of fortune were unfolded at the junction of eras and “warring kingdoms”, the freemasonry of the Russian Abroad was, is and will be the consolidating ground which tailors together torn to ribands uniforms during ideological battles, pacifies the most controversial and outspoken minds on the barricades of opposing forces, bravely defends the usurped human rights and freedoms in the hours of social discord and moral turmoil, stands at the wheel of the ship when the last liberal and progressist fails in front of the torrent of the storm in the open ocean. Because the truth of freemasonry is responsive and infinite in its patient anticipation for the wanderer who has stepped on the path of its exploration.
