Silence in the structure of myth
Pavel Sergeevich Kiriltsev
Философия и культура October 1, 2026 DOI: 10.7256/2454-0757.2026.10.80979 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Theoretical or philosophical paper Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Key points | Argues that omission is a culturally marked, intentional absence that productively organizes meaning rather than a defect in a cultural text. Proposes an analytical model identifying four forms of creating absence—prohibitive, substitutive, esoteric-distributive, and apophatic—and contends that silence sets the conditions of communication by protecting the sacred, distributing knowledge by levels of access, maintaining ritual hierarchy, and marking the limits of expressibility. |
Abstract
The subject of this study is omission as an intentional, culturally marked absence of a significant element within a mythological or ritual system, which is recognised by participants in the tradition and regulates access to names, knowledge, ritual experience and sacred boundaries. The aim of this article is to demonstrate the productive nature of such an absence as a means of organising meaning, rather than as a defect in a cultural text. Omission is distinguished from an accidental lacuna in a source, from secrecy as a social form of concealing knowledge, from a speech ban as a normative restriction on expression, and from inexpressibility as an indication of the limits of language. The empirical basis comprises the Eleusinian Mysteries, the tradition of the Tetragrammaton, the Egyptian myth of Isis and Ra, the Upanishadic transmission of knowledge, shamanic initiation and the Daoist concept of the Dao. The methodological basis of the study is formed by semiotic and structural analysis, the anthropology of ritual, the sociology of mystery, and a comparative-typological approach. The scientific novelty of the article lies in the development of an analytical model of omission as a culturally marked absence, examined through the object of omission, the mechanism of its creation, its social and sacred functions, and its structural effect. Within the framework of the model, four forms of creating absence are identified: prohibitive, substitutive, esoteric-distributive and apophatic; these may be combined within a single tradition. In addition to archaic religious and mythological materials, the article demonstrates the applicability of the proposed model to contemporary cultural narratives, using Andrei Zvyagintsev’s film "The Return" as an example, which is examined as a test case for the analytical framework. The main conclusion is that silence does not halt communication, but rather sets its conditions: it protects the sacred from profanation, distributes knowledge according to levels of access, distinguishes between the initiated and the uninitiated, maintains ritual hierarchy and social statuses, marks the limits of expressibility, and may give rise to a hidden structural centre as a possible effect of mythological or ritual construction.