The origin of the Crimean Karaims and transformations of Karaism in the hermeneutic circle of history interpretation

Abstract

The aim of the article is the conceptual reconstruction of the origin of the Crimean Karaims as an ethnic group and determination of the factors which played the main role in the formation of their faith – the Karaism. The actual topicality of the theme under analysis is stipulated by the definite factors, which are of both ethnic and religious origin. At present there still happen fervent academic debates that make the borderline between two opposing scientific approaches concerning the key issues of the Karaims’ origin and their faith. The opponents – or the proponents – of both scientific trends are claiming that the problem is “absolutely and fully” solved, but this very fact speaks for the evidence of its definite ambiguity in solving the problems of theory and in approaching the issues of research. The methods. The methodology, used in the article, is stipulated by the specific features of the research object, which calls for the complex interdisciplinary analysis including both the approaches of the hermeneutic interpretation and the comparative historical methods. The interdisciplinary dialogue serves its goal in this paper, involving different academic subjects in one attempt at the whole analysis. This methodology is so important in this case because the objective covers the analysis of the generalized vision of the wide problematic field. The latter includes historical-comparative methods, hermeneutic approaches, deconstruction techniques, etc., which can help history and theology communicate in the mutually beneficial dialogue. The main results. The research of the ethnic origin of the Crimean Karaims in the context of the transformations of their faith – the Karaism reveals the ambivalent interpretations of their history and worships. The authors’ conception confirms the hypothesis of the Karaims’ origin as the Turks and substantiates the idea of the Biblicism as a source of their faith. The concise conclusion. The Crimean Karaims (Karai) being the Tengrianists before the 1st century A. D. then adopted the pure Biblicism through the Crimean local ethnic groups. Anan’s teaching having complemented the Biblicism did not change its main ideas. The practical meaning is connected with the accentualization of the scientific interest in the historical heritage of the non-numerous ethnic group – the Karaims under the conditions of the risks and the threats of the globalization processes. The project of Man has been constructing the system of values for thousands of years, and nowadays the critically minded postmodern man or woman cannot be free from the absolutes of faith, from the ultimate concepts of philosophy. And namely at this historical stage those obvious criteria can help the postmodern person to perceive that moral law that is the intrinsic value of the human being. The originality. The research problems have not been yet the subject of the special investigation in the Ukrainian science. The scientific novelty. The foundation of the Karaims’ religion is the Biblicism which had come into existence 500 years before the Judaism appeared as the worship. Thus, the Karaism cannot be considered a sect of the Judaism. The type of the article: analytical.

Postmodern conflictology: issues of theory and approaches to methodology

“…….In the binary opposition "globalism -nationalism" the second number is in fact used as a synonym of "patriotism" and it signifies the features of hating or showing love of one's country and readiness to defend it, thus it accentuates the heterogeneity of "We", and the difference of the "Other". It should not be right to stress the "collective identity", we, citizens and compatriots, are not identical in all the respects, in any case, there are differences among us; but when it comes to defending our common position -whatever it could be -it is usually clear, that the "Other" difference is more important, and it outbalances all the "pros" (Barash, Vlasova, Martseniuk, & Charkina, 2020). As Z. Bauman puts it, the borderlines, which separate "us" from "them", are clearly stated, defined and understood by all the "actors": both subjects and objects of the social actions.…”