Аннотация. Актуальность статьи основывается на необходимости разработки концептуального аппарата, учитывающего двойственность феномена религии, выступающего, как институт некоторой «конфессии», описывающий себя с позиций узаконенных им самим определённых норм. При этом он же выступает как «народное», «личное» и «живое» верование, непосредственно переживаемое индивидом. Предметом данного исследования является трансформация подходов к феномену «народная религия», актуализированная религиоведением, специализирующимся на проблемах антропологии и фольклористики. Методологической основой статьи выступает анализ семантики в русскоязычных и иностранных первоисточниках, представленных в лингвистических корпусах. Новизну исследования составляет анализ понимания религии через призму различений основных коннотаций слова «народ» в российских текстах XI-XX вв. В ходе исследования выявлено изменение семантики: древняя альтернатива «вече» / «чернь» сменяется различением «российские подданные» / «крестьяне/христиане», носителей «народной мудрости» / «народных суеверий», которое замещается конструированием поэтики универсальных образов «единомыслия народа» и «строителя социализма/коммунизма». Понимание солидарности как религии «единомыслия» трансформируется от идеала «правоверия» князя Владимира, противопоставившего «веру христиан» и «суеверия язычников», через альтернативу «верных христиан» / «неверных басурман» к дистанцированию «православных христиан» / «раскольников», сменяясь поисками путей реализации идеала триады «самодержавие, православие, народность» (XIX в.), радикально трансформированного в СССР. В качестве новых перспектив описания религии как индивидуальных, локальных и повседневных Исследовательская статья УДК 008 81`37

The phenomenon of the miraculous cannot be removed from human existence, no matter how much its presence contradicts the arguments of reason, legislation, or common sense. Its attractiveness for philosophical reflection has been evident since the ancient classics (4th century BC), when the very phenomenon of admiration was considered the root cause of knowledge by Plato and Aristotle. The miraculous turns out to be semantically interconnected with religious communication, understood as the observation of the unknown, inexpressible, inaccessible within the familiar (N. Luhmann), including its naming and classification. This study is devoted to identifying the basic sociocultural differences and their dynamics associated with the lexeme miracle in the Russian context of the 11th–18th centuries based on the analysis of written sources. Tracing the evolution of the semantics of the miraculous, identifying the criteria for assigning such a characteristic to a certain phenomenon and the value assessment of what was called a miracle, the following trends are revealed. On the one hand, it is a differentiation from religious communication, which distinguishes between true and false miracles depending on the origin (for example, the Christian God or the Magi, fortune tellers, sorcerers, etc.). On the other hand, there is an increase in the complexity of the phenomenon itself, acquiring by the end of the 18th century various communication features. These are true/false miracles in religion; legal/ illegal in the field of state regulation of public life (starting with the legislation of Peter the Great); miracle as superstition, deceit and quackery for selfish purposes, i.e. marginal communication, contrary to science, morality, law and the ideals of the Enlightenment as the worldview of the elites; as a historical and cultural phenomenon (in works related to the history, ethnography and folklore that are emerging in Russia); as an artistic mean (functional element) in literature.

The conceptual network used in modern religious studies is being constantly updated and supplemented with new terms, while “classical” concepts are undergoing semantic shifts as well. This paper is focused on the history of the notions of lived religion and vernacular religion, which entered the scientific lexicon in the late 20th century. Both terms relate to the study of everyday life and its philosophical understanding and are based on extensive empirical research as well as anthropological data. The concepts of lived religion and vernacular religion were proposed by scholars as an alternative to the traditional and widespread binary schemes for describing religion, which contrast the high/low, elite/folk and institutionalized/non-institutionalized forms of religion. The genesis and spread of these concepts reflected the general trend, which consists in refraining from applying a uniform Western European model and denominational theological discourse to the variable phenomena of religious experience. The term lived religion, which originated in memoirs and biographical literature, characterized the personal experience of Christians, extending to the daily religious practices of various traditions. Vernacular religion goes back to the Latin word vernaculus, which had been used to describe something native, local, domestic and, later, to distinguish the local language from the official Latin. The term was proposed by philologists to solve religious problems of studying unorganized, spontaneous, everyday and individual forms of manifestation of religion. Currently, both terms are being successfully used, including in Russian scientific discourse, in religious studies on various phenomena of materialization, kitsch, gender and many other aspects of religion.