The study serves as an introduction to the publication of B. Baradin’s (1878-1937) theses for the lecture by A. Dorzhiev (1853-1938), which was to be read at the international Buddhist exhibition planned in Leningrad in 1927. The author dwells in detail on the biographies of the Buryat academic scientist B. Baradin, as well as his Buddhist mentor Geshe A. Dorzhiev, at whose request he compiled theses. Turning to the history of the first Buddhist exhibition, which took place during the Civil (...) War in 1919, the author notes the contribution of academic scientists S.F. Oldenburg, B.Ya. Vladimirtsov, F.I. Shcherbatsky and O.O. Rosenberg. The role of Shcherbatsky, who sought to present Buddhism as a completely unique religion, consonant with modern science and not based on blind faith, is particularly emphasized. This was supposed to put Buddhism in a favorable light before the Bolsheviks and the Soviet government and prevent persecution against it. Shcherbatsky’s contribution to the ideology of the Buddhist renewal movement, whose leaders sought to cooperate with the atheistic authorities, was noted. The historical circumstances in which the second, already international, exhibition was being prepared and the reasons why it could not take place are discussed. Focusing on the content of Baradin’s theses, the author emphasizes that the main thing in them was the proximity of Buddhism to the ideology of the West and modern science. In conclusion, the author notes that the theme of the convergence of Buddhism and science has anticipated modern Western scientific research on Buddhist meditation practices, as well as discussions between Western scientists and the Dalai Lama about the benefits of Buddhist psychopractics for the modern world. (shrink)

The publication presents for the first time the B. Baradin’s theses to A. Dorzhiev’s lecture that was supposed to be delivered at the international Buddhist exhibition in Leningrad in 1927. A. Dorzhiev was a famous Buryat lama who received the academic title of Geshe (the highest philosophical academic degree in the Gelug tradition of Tibetan Buddhism) upon completion of his philosophical education in the monasteries of Mongolia and Tibet. After 1918, he was involved in organizational issues of the Buddhist Sangha (...) in Russia. B. Baradin was an academic scientist and public figure, a professor at St. Petersburg University, and the author of studies on the history and teachings of Tibetan Buddhism. After the revolution of 1917, he began working in Buryatia in various administrative positions, focusing on the organization of the scientific and cultural life of the Republic. Their main idea is that the modern world consists of the two equal parts - East and West, unification of which is possible and even necessary for the further development of humanity. The system-forming teaching of the East is Buddhism; and the lecture hold on those aspects of Buddhist philosophy that could be compared with the teachings of the West. Four points are highlighted: 1) Buddhism is comparable to Darwin’s theory in that both consider humans in the context of all living beings in an evolutionary manner; 2) Buddhism, like science, accepts the determinism principle; 3) the Buddhist concept of shunya is similar to the relativistic principles of physics; and 4) the system of Buddhist psychotechniques is similar to the theory of reflexology. B. Baradin concludes that Indo-Buddhist culture and European culture are complementary and their rapprochement will bring us closer to a truly universal culture. The theses mentioned here are, apparently, the first systematic exposition of the views of neo-Buddhists-renewalists on the points of convergence between Buddhist and Western cultures. (shrink)

This work presents the two surviving letters preserved from the extensive correspondence of V.E. Sesemann, a professor of philosophy at Vilnius University at the time (1961), and B.D. Dandaron, a Buddhist teacher who was a researcher at the Buryat Integrated Research Institute at that time. The letters discuss the authors’ current work and creative plans, as well as everyday life and resettling after release from prison in 1956. In his letter, B.D. Dandaron devotes significant attention to a list of literature (...) that he was using in writing a study on aesthetics and/or that was mentioned in the records of the lectures of V.E. Sesemann in the prison camp. The letters give some idea of the nature of the relations between the correspondents and the areas of their research interests. The publication is preceded by a preface, which offers reflections on the context of the appearance of lectures on aesthetics that formed the basis of B.D. Dandaron’s research interest in this issue. The preface also provides context on the prison camp “seminar” on philosophy, in which the correspondents were active participants. V.E. Sesemann lectured on a wide range of areas in Western philosophy, including aesthetics, the history of philosophy, and philosophical anthropology. B.D. Dandaron lectured on the philosophy and practice of Buddhism. B.D. Dandaron’s particular interest in aesthetic issues was due to the fact that in the system of Buddhist teachings he developed, he paid great attention to the development of emotional intuition (associated with aesthetic perception) as an intermediate link between the rational intuition inherent in every person and the emotional-mystical intuition developed during yogic practice. (shrink)