XML FeedsTHE UNKNOWN LIFE OF JESUS CHRIST
 |
Here is the origin of the trimurti:
In the beginning, Para-Brahma created the waters and threw into them the
seed of procreation, which transformed itself into a brilliant egg,
wherein Brahma's image was reflected. Millions of years had passed when
Brahma split the egg in two halves, of which the upper one became the
heaven, the lower one, the earth. Then Brahma descended to the earth
under the shape of a child, established himself upon a lotus flower,
absorbed himself in his own contemplation and put to himself the
question: "Who will attend to the conservation of what I have created?"
"I," came the answer from his mouth under the appearance of a flame. And
Brahma gave to this word the name, "Vishnu," that is to say, "he who
preserves." Then Brahma divided his being into two halves, the one male,
the other female, the active and the passive principles, the union of
which produced Siva, "the destroyer."
These are the attributes of the trimurti; Brahma, creative principle;
Vishnu, preservative wisdom; Siva, destructive wrath of justice. Brahma
is the substance from which everything was made; Vishnu, space wherein
everything lives; and Siva, time that annihilates all things.
Brahma is the face which vivifies all; Vishnu, the water which sustains
the forces of the creatures; Siva, the fire which breaks the bond that
unites all objects. Brahma is the past; Vishnu, the present; Siva, the
future. Each part of the trimurti possesses, moreover, a wife. The wife
of Brahma is Sarasvati, goddess of wisdom; that of Vishnu, Lakshmi,
goddess of virtue, and Siva's spouse is Kali, goddess of death, the
universal destroyer.
Of this last union were born, Ganesa, the elephant-headed god of wisdom,
and Indra, the god of the firmament, both chiefs of inferior divinities,
the number of which, if all the objects of adoration of the Hindus be
included, amounts to three hundred millions.
Vishnu has descended eight times upon the earth, incarnating in a fish
in order to save the Vedas from the deluge, in a tortoise, a dwarf, a
wild boar, a lion, in Rama, a king's son, in Krishna and in Buddha. He
will come a ninth time under the form of a rider mounted on a white
horse in order to destroy death and sin.
Jesus denied the existence of all these hierarchic absurdities of gods,
which darken the great principle of monotheism.
When the Brahmins saw that Jesus, who, instead of becoming one of their
party, as they had hoped, turned out to be their adversary, and that the
people began to embrace his doctrine, they resolved to kill him; but his
servants, who were greatly attached to him, forewarned him of the
threatening danger, and he took refuge in the mountains of Nepaul. At
this epoch, Buddhism had taken deep root in this country. It was a kind
of schism, remarkable by its moral principles and ideas on the nature of
the divinity--ideas which brought men closer to nature and to one
another.
Sakya-Muni, the founder of this sect, was born fifteen hundred years
before Jesus Christ, at Kapila, the capital of his father's kingdom,
near Nepaul, in the Himalayas. He belonged to the race of the Gotamides,
and to the ancient family of the Sakyas. From his infancy he evinced a
lively interest in religion, and, contrary to his father's wishes,
leaving his palace with all its luxury, began at once to preach against
the Brahmins, for the purification of their doctrines. He died at
Kouçinagara, surrounded by many faithful disciples. His body was burned,
and his ashes, divided into several parts, were distributed between the
cities, which, on account of his new doctrine, had renounced Brahminism.
According to the Buddhistic doctrine, the Creator reposes normally in a
state of perfect inaction, which is disturbed by nothing and which he
only leaves at certain destiny-determined epochs, in order to create
terrestrial buddhas. To this end the Spirit disengages itself from the
sovereign Creator, incarnates in a buddha and stays for some time on
the earth, where he creates Bodhisattvas (masters),[3] whose mission it
is to preach the divine word and to found new churches of believers to
whom they will give laws, and for whom they will institute a new
religious order according to the traditions of Buddhism.
A terrestrial buddha is, in a certain way, a reflection of the sovereign
creative Buddha, with whom he unites after the termination of his
terrestrial existence. In like manner do the Bodhisattvas, as a reward
for their labors and the privations they undergo, receive eternal bliss
and enjoy a rest which nothing can disturb.
Jesus sojourned six years among the Buddhists, where he found the
principle of monotheism still pure. Arrived at the age of twenty-six
years, he remembered his fatherland, which was then oppressed by a
foreign yoke. On his way homeward, he preached against idol worship,
human sacrifice, and other errors of faith, admonishing the people to
recognize and adore God, the Father of all beings, to whom all are alike
dear, the master as well as the slave; for they all are his children, to
whom he has given this beautiful universe for a common heritage. The
sermons of Jesus often made a profound impression upon the peoples among
whom he came, and he was exposed to all sorts of dangers provoked by the
clergy, but was saved by the very idolators who, only the preceding day,
had offered their children as sacrifices to their idols.
While passing through Persia, Jesus almost caused a revolution among the
adorers of Zoroaster's doctrine. Nevertheless, the priests refrained
from killing him, out of fear of the people's vengeance. They resorted
to artifice, and led him out of town at night, with the hope that he
might be devoured by wild beasts. Jesus escaped this peril and arrived
safe and sound in the country of Israel.
It must be remarked here that the Orientals, amidst their sometimes so
picturesque misery, and in the ocean of depravation in which they
slumber, always have, under the influence of their priests and teachers,
a pronounced inclination for learning and understand easily good common
sense explications. It happened to me more than once that, by using
simple words of truth, I appealed to the conscience of a thief or some
otherwise intractable person. These people, moved by a sentiment of
innate honesty,--which the clergy for personal reasons of their own,
tried by all means to stifle--soon became again very honest and had only
contempt for those who had abused their confidence.
By the virtue of a mere word of truth, the whole of India, with its
300,000,000 of idols, could be made a vast Christian country; but ...
this beautiful project would, no doubt, be antagonized by certain
Christians who, similar to those priests of whom I have spoken before,
speculate upon the ignorance of the people to make themselves rich.
According to St. Luke, Jesus was about thirty years of age when he began
preaching to the Israelites. According to the Buddhistic chroniclers,
Jesus's teachings in Judea began in his twenty-ninth year. All his
sermons which are not mentioned by the Evangelists, but have been
preserved by the Buddhists, are remarkable for their character of divine
grandeur. The fame of the new prophet spread rapidly in the country, and
Jerusalem awaited with impatience his arrival. When he came near the
holy city, its inhabitants went out to meet him, and led him in triumph
to the temple; all of which is in agreement with Christian tradition.
The chiefs and elders who heard him were filled with admiration for his
sermons, and were happy to see the beneficent impression which his words
exercised upon the populace. All these remarkable sermons of Jesus are
full of sublime sentiments.
Pilate, the governor of the country, however, did not look upon the
matter in the same light. Eager agents notified him that Jesus announced
the near coming of a new kingdom, the reestablishment of the throne of
Israel, and that he suffered himself to be called the Son of God, sent
to bring back courage in Israel, for he, the King of Judea, would soon
ascend the throne of his ancestors.
I do not purpose attributing to Jesus the _rôle_ of a revolutionary, but
it seems to me very probable that Jesus wrought up the people with a
view to reestablish the throne to which he had a just claim. Divinely
inspired, and, at the same time, convinced of the legitimacy of his
pretentions, Jesus preached the spiritual union of the people in order
that a political union might result.
Pilate, who felt alarmed over these rumors, called together the priests
and the elders of the people and ordered them to interdict Jesus from
preaching in public, and even to condemn him in the temple under the
charge of apostasy. This was the best means for Pilate to rid himself of
a dangerous man, whose royal origin he knew and whose popularity was
constantly increasing.
It must be said in this connection that the Israelites, far from
persecuting Jesus, recognized in him the descendant of the illustrious
dynasty of David, and made him the object of their secret hopes, a fact
which is evident from the very Gospels which tell that Jesus preached
freely in the temple, in the presence of the elders, who could have
interdicted him not only the entrance to the temple, but also his
preachings.
Upon the order of Pilate the Sanhedrim met and cited Jesus to appear
before its tribunal. As the result of the inquiry, the members of the
Sanhedrim informed Pilate that his suspicions were without any
foundation whatever; that Jesus preached a religious, and not a
political, propaganda; that he was expounding the Divine word, and that
he claimed to have come not to overthrow, but to reestablish the laws of
Moses. The Buddhistic record does but confirm this sympathy, which
unquestionably existed between the young preacher, Jesus, and the elders
of the people of Israel; hence their answer: "We do not judge a just
one."
Pilate felt not at all assured, and continued seeking an occasion to
hale Jesus before a new tribunal, as regular as the former. To this end
he caused him to be followed by spies, and finally ordered his arrest.
If we may believe the Evangelists, it was the Pharisees who sought the
life of Jesus, while the Buddhistic record most positively declares that
Pilate alone can be held responsible for his execution. This version is
evidently much more probable than the account of the Evangelists. The
conquerors of Judea could not long tolerate the presence of a man who
announced to the people a speedy deliverance from their yoke. The
popularity of Jesus having commenced to disturb Pilate's mind, it is to
be supposed that he sent after the young preacher spies, with the order
to take note of all his words and acts. Moreover, the servants of the
Roman governor, as true "agents provocateurs," endeavored by means of
artful questions put to Jesus, to draw from him some imprudent words
under color of which Pilate might proceed against him. If the preachings
of Jesus had been offensive to the Hebrew priests and scribes, all they
needed to do was simply to command the people not to hear and follow
him, and to forbid him entrance into the temple. But the Evangelists
tell us that Jesus enjoyed great popularity among the Israelites and
full liberty in the temples, where Pharisees and scribes discussed with
him.
In order to find a valid excuse for condemning him, Pilate had him
tortured so as to extort from him a confession of high treason.
But, contrary to the rule that the innocent, overcome by their pain,
will confess anything to escape the unendurable agonies inflicted upon
them, Jesus made no admission of guilt. Pilate, seeing that the usual
tortures were powerless to accomplish the desired result, commanded the
executioners to proceed to the last extreme of their diabolic cruelties,
meaning to compass the death of Jesus by the complete exhaustion of his
forces. Jesus, however, fortifying his endurance by the power of his
will and zeal for his righteous cause--which was also that of his people
and of God--was unconquerable by all the refinements of cruelty
inflicted upon him by his executioners.
The infliction of "the question" upon Jesus evoked much feeling among
the elders, and they resolved to interfere in his behalf; formally
demanding of Pilate that he should be liberated before the Passover.
When their request was denied by Pilate they resolved to petition that
Jesus should be brought to trial before the Sanhedrim, by whom they did
not doubt his acquittal--which was ardently desired by the people--would
be ordained.
In the eyes of the priests, Jesus was a saint, belonging to the family
of David; and his unjust detention, or--what was still more to be
dreaded--his condemnation, would have saddened the celebration of the
great national festival of the Israelites.
They therefore prayed Pilate that the trial of Jesus should take place
before the Passover, and to this he acceded. But he ordered that two
thieves should be tried at the same time with Jesus, thinking to, in
this way, minimize in the eyes of the people, the importance of the fact
that the life of an innocent man was being put in jeopardy before the
tribunal; and, by not allowing Jesus to be condemned alone, blind the
populace to the unjust prearrangement of his condemnation.
The accusation against Jesus was founded upon the depositions of the
bribed witnesses.
During the trial, Pilate availed himself of perversions of Jesus' words
concerning the heavenly kingdom, to sustain the charges made against
him. He counted, it seems, upon the effect produced by the answers of
Jesus, as well as upon his own authority, to influence the members of
the tribunal against examining too minutely the details of the case, and
to procure from them the sentence of death for which he intimated his
desire.
Upon hearing the perfectly natural answer of the judges, that the
meaning of the words of Jesus was diametrically opposed to the
accusation, and that there was nothing in them to warrant his
condemnation, Pilate employed his final resource for prejudicing the
trial, viz., the deposition of a purchased traitorous informer. This
miserable wretch--who was, no doubt, Judas--accused Jesus formally, of
having incited the people to rebellion.
Then followed a scene of unsurpassed sublimity. When Judas gave his
testimony, Jesus, turning toward him, and giving him his blessing, says:
"Thou wilt find mercy, for what thou has said did not come out from
thine own heart!" Then, addressing himself to the governor: "Why dost
thou lower thy dignity, and teach thy inferiors to tell falsehood, when
without doing so it is in thy power to condemn an innocent man?"
Words touching as sublime! Jesus Christ here manifests all the grandeur
of his soul by pardoning his betrayer, and he reproaches Pilate with
having resorted to such means, unworthy of his dignity, to attain his
end.
This keen reproach enraged the governor, and caused him to completely
forget his position, and the prudent policy with which he had meant to
evade personal responsibility for the crime he contemplated. He now
imperiously demanded the conviction of Jesus, and, as though he
intended to make a display of his power, to overawe the judges, ordered
the acquittal of the two thieves.
The judges, seeing the injustice of Pilate's demand, that they should
acquit the malefactors and condemn the innocent Jesus, refused to commit
this double crime against their consciences and their laws. But as they
could not cope with one who possessed the authority of final judgment,
and saw that he was firmly decided to rid himself, by whatever means, of
a man who had fallen under the suspicions of the Roman authorities, they
left him to himself pronounce the verdict for which he was so anxious.
In order, however, that the people might not suspect them of sharing the
responsibility for such unjust judgment, which would not readily have
been forgiven, they, in leaving the court, performed the ceremony of
washing their hands, symbolizing the affirmation that they were clean of
the blood of the innocent Jesus, the beloved of the people.
About ten years ago, I read in a German journal, the _Fremdenblatt_, an
article on Judas, wherein the author endeavored to demonstrate that the
informer had been the best friend of Jesus. According to him, it was out
of love for his master that Judas betrayed him, for he put blind faith
in the words of the Saviour, who said that his kingdom would arrive
after his execution. But after seeing him on the cross, and having
waited in vain for the resurrection of Jesus, which he expected to
immediately take place, Judas, not able to bear the pain by which his
heart was torn, committed suicide by hanging himself. It would be
profitless to dwell upon this ingenious product of a fertile
imagination.
To take up again the accounts of the Gospels and the Buddhistic
chronicle, it is very possible that the bribed informer was really
Judas, although the Buddhistic version is silent on this point. As to
the pangs of conscience which are said to have impelled the informer to
suicide, I must say that I give no credence to them. A man capable of
committing so vile and cowardly an action as that of making an
infamously false accusation against his friend, and this, not out of a
spirit of jealousy, or for revenge, but to gain a handful of shekels!
such a man is, from the psychic point of view, of very little worth. He
ignores honesty and conscience, and pangs of remorse are unknown to him.
It is presumable that the governor treated him as is sometimes done in
our days, when it is deemed desirable to effectually conceal state
secrets known to men of his kind and presumably unsafe in their keeping.
Judas probably was simply hanged, by Pilate's order, to prevent the
possibility of his some day revealing that the plot of which Jesus was a
victim had been inspired by the authorities.
On the day of the execution, a numerous detachment of Roman soldiers was
placed around the cross to guard against any attempt by the populace for
the delivery of him who was the object of their veneration. In this
occurrence Pilate gave proof of his extraordinary firmness and
resolution.
But though, owing to the precautions taken by the governor, the
anticipated revolt did not occur, he could not prevent the people, after
the execution, mourning the ruin of their hopes, which were destroyed,
together with the last scion of the race of David. All the people went
to worship at Jesus' grave. Although we have no precise information
concerning the occurrences of the first few days following the Passion,
we could, by some probable conjectures, reconstruct the scenes which
must have taken place.
It stands to reason that the Roman Cæsar's clever lieutenant, when he
saw that Christ's grave became the centre of universal lamentations and
the subject of national grief, and feared that the memory of the
righteous victim might excite the discontent of the people and raise the
whole country against the foreigners' rule, should have employed any
effective means for the removal of this rallying-point, the mortal
remains of Jesus. Pilate began by having the body buried. For three days
the soldiers who were stationed on guard at the grave, were exposed to
all kinds of insults and injuries on the part of the people who, defying
the danger, came in multitudes to mourn the great martyr. Then Pilate
ordered his soldiers to remove the body at night, and to bury it
clandestinely in some other place, leaving the first grave open and the
guard withdrawn from it, so that the people could see that Jesus had
disappeared. But Pilate missed his end; for when, on the following
morning, the Hebrews did not find the corpse of their master in the
sepulchre, the superstitious and miracle-accepting among them thought
that he had been resurrected.
How did this legend take root? We cannot say. Possibly it existed for a
long time in a latent state and, at the beginning, spread only among the
common people; perhaps the ecclesiastic authorities of the Hebrews
looked with indulgence upon this innocent belief, which gave to the
oppressed a shadow of revenge on their oppressors. However it be, the
day when the legend of the resurrection finally became known to all,
there was no one to be found strong enough to demonstrate the
impossibility of such an occurrence.
Concerning this resurrection, it must be remarked that, according to the
Buddhists, the soul of the just Issa was united with the eternal Being,
while the Evangelists insist upon the ascension of the body. It seems to
me, however, that the Evangelists and the Apostles have done very well
to give the description of the resurrection which they have agreed upon,
for if they had not done so, _i.e._, if the miracle had been given a
less material character, their preaching would not have had, in the
eyes of the nations to whom it was presented, that divine authority,
that avowedly supernatural character, which has clothed Christianity,
until our time, as the only religion capable of elevating the human race
to a state of sublime enthusiasm, suppressing its savage instincts, and
bringing it nearer to the grand and simple nature which God has
bestowed, they say, upon that feeble dwarf called man.
