The Esoteric Character of the Gospels

Cover of the magazine Lucifer

The Esoteric Character of the Gospels is an article published in three parts: in November-December 1887, and in February 1888, in the theosophical magazine Lucifer; it was compiled by Helena Blavatsky.[note 1] It was included in the 8th volume of the author's Collected Writings.[2] In 1888, for this work, the author was awarded Subba Row medal.[3][note 2]

Analysis of contents

Versus clerics

Senkevich noted that Blavatsky did not make secrets out of her "skeptical attitude towards Gospels," considering them unrelated to either Jesus or his Apostles.[5] Criticizing intolerance and dogmatism of the clergy, she writes in her article that "Christianity is now the religion of arrogance par excellence, a stepping-stone for ambition, a sinecure for wealth, sham and power; a convenient screen for hypocrisy."[6][note 3]

Blavatsky argues that clerics "have split the one divine Truth into fragments" — they have organized in the Protestant camp alone 350 dissimilar sects. She writes that if to admit that one of these sects is not far from the truth, then all the others should be false on necessary.[9][note 4]

In her article Blavatsky repeatedly quotes and refers to the egyptologist Massey. Using Massey's words, she writes that sacred books "are 'magazines of falsehoods,'[11][note 5] if accepted in the exoteric dead-letter interpretations of their ancient, and especially their modern, theological glossarists."[13][note 6] Thus, all of them have served "as a means for securing power and of supporting the ambitious policy of an unscrupulous priesthood. All have promoted superstition, all made of their gods blood-thirsty and ever-damning Molochs and fiends, as all have made nations to serve the latter more than the God of Truth."[15]

Ellwood wrote that Blavatsky was a ruthless critic of the church tradition of Christianity, whether in relation to "the Church Fathers or modern priests, pastors and missionaries." The reason for her hostility to church Christianity "was what she perceived as arrogance combined with misplaced concreteness." She believed that "churchmen, past and present, whether through intentional deceit or mere stupidity, had concealed the real origin and meaning of Christianity as a vehicle of the ancient wisdom."[16]

Origins of Christianity

Referring to hers Masters,[note 7] Blavatsky argues that the origins of Christianity should be sought out in the Gnostic and Hebrew scriptures:

"Whence, then, the Gospels, the life of Jesus of Nazareth? Has it not been repeatedly stated that no human, mortal brain could have invented the life of the Jewish Reformer, followed by the awful drama on Calvary? We say on the authority of the esoteric Eastern School, that all this came from the Gnostics, as far as the name Christos and the astronomico-mystical allegories are concerned, and from the writings of the ancient Tanaïm as regards the Kabalistic connection of Jesus or Joshua, with the Biblical personifications."[19]

In one of the footnotes to the article, the author explains that the Gospels "are made up of fragments of Gnostic wisdom, the groundwork of which is pre-Christian and built on the Mysteries of Initiation."[20][21][note 8]

Historical Jesus

Blavatsky believes that historical Jesus and the evangelical Christ are different persons. She mentions the statement of Talmud, according to which Jesus was "the son of one named Pandira,[note 9] and having lived a century earlier than the era called Christian."[25][26][note 10] And in conclusion:

"Accused by the Jews of having learned the magic art in Egypt, and of having stolen from the Holy of Holies the Incommunicable Name, Jehoshua (Jesus) was put to death by the Sanhedrin at Lüd.[note 11] He was stoned and then crucified on a tree, on the eve of Passover."[30][note 12]

Chrestos and Christos

Blavatsky writes that it is necessary to distinguish between Chrêstos and Christos (Christ). The first name, in her opinion, means neophyte who approaching to Initiation, and the second she defines in this way: "Christ— the true esoteric Saviour—is no man, but the Divine Principle in every human being."[33][note 13] She believes that Christians have lost the understanding of the true meaning of the word Christos: "The very meaning of the terms Chrêstos and Christos, and the bearing of both on 'Jesus of Nazareth,' a name coined out of Joshua the Nazar, has now become a dead letter for all with the exception of non-Christian Occultists."[35]

The author states that Adepts who were living and dying for the sake of humanity were existing in all times. In ancient times there were many holy people who bore the title of Chrestos even before Jesus of Nazareth, like Socrates and many others who could be called "Chrêstos, i.e., the 'good, and excellent,' the gentle, and the holy Initiate, who showed the 'way' to the Christos condition, and thus became himself 'the Way' in the hearts of his enthusiastic admirers."[36][37] She writes that the Christians similarly to the other admirers of heroes have tried to go ahead of "all the other Chrêstoi, who have appeared to them as rivals of their Man-God."[38]

Blavatsky allegorically proclaims: "Christos was 'the Way,' while Chrêstos was the lonely traveller journeying on to reach the ultimate goal through that 'Path,' which goal was Christos, the glorified Spirit of 'Truth.'"[39] She writes further:

"Christos is the crown of glory of the suffering Chrêstos of the mysteries, as of the candidate to the final Union, of whatever race and creed.[40][37] To the true follower of the Spirit of Truth, it matters little, therefore, whether Jesus, as man and Chrêstos, lived during the era called Christian, or before, or never lived at all."[41]

Blavatsky argues that "Christos, or the 'Christ-condition' was ever the synonym of the 'Mahatmic-condition,' i.e., the union of the man with the divine principle in him."[42] In this connection:

"One has to die in Chrêstos, i.e., kill one's personality and its passions, to blot out every idea of separateness from one's 'Father,' the Divine Spirit in man; to become one with the eternal and absolute Life and Light (Sat) before one can reach the glorious state of Christos, the regenerated man, the man in spiritual freedom."[43]

Criticism

This article by Blavatsky always aroused rejection on the part of those who professed the teachings of Jesus only literally.[44][note 14] Thus, a priest Drujinin (Russian Orthodox Church) claimed that the theosophists "had reduced" Jesus Christ to the level of one of the Adepts and even generally questioned his existence.[46] And moreover:

"The founders of Theosophy deny the importance of Christ's crucifixion.[note 15] Recognizing within the framework of the concepts karma and reincarnation the possibility of paying by sufferings only for their own sins, they actually represent the sufferings of the Lord Jesus Christ only as a tragicomic mistake."[46][note 16]

On the other hand, Kuhn, being a supporter of Christ myth theory, stated that esotericism "hung up midway" between recognizing the Gospels as documents of early Christian history or treating them as an allegory. He wrote that Blavatsky contributed to this "anomalous" situation: arguing in one place that "Christ— the true esoteric Saviour—is no man, but the Divine Principle in every human being,"[49] she in another place supports a thesis about the real existence of the Jewish Adept Jesus. Kuhn proclaimed: "The matter of the existence or non-existence of a certain man in human history is not dual in nature. Either Jesus, the Gospel Figure, was a person in human body, or he was not."[50][note 17]

According to Ellwood, many of Blavatsky's "onslaughts" against Christianity, including her attacks on organizations that devoted themselves to "good works such as the Salvation Army, were not always even-handed." Moreover, she apparently didn't know about the nascent liberal branch of Christian theology — "Schleiermacher, Coleridge, Channing, Kingsley and many others" who had nothing to do to the primitive "dogmatism she so hated." Nevertheless, her attacks on church Christianity can be seen as necessary to fulfill the task of the Theosophical Society connected with the formation of a "new spirituality based on an immanent universalism" which opposing aggressive religiosity "she saw all around, whether in European bishops or in missionaries abroad."[16]

Publications

Translations

See also

Notes

  1. ↑ Lucifer, Vol. 1, November 1887, p. 173–80; December 1887, p. 299–309; February 1888, p. 490–96.[1]
  2. ↑ When the Theosophical Society was created, the encouraging of "the study of comparative religion, philosophy, and science" was proclaimed his second major task.[4]
  3. ↑ Noting in church Christianity the dogmatism generated by the "painful ambition of its hierarchs," Blavatsky regarded it exclusively as a religious sanctification of "power over people."[7] Hall wrote: "The bishops of the church were mortal men instinctively desiring power and authority, and they sacrificed the spiritual doctrines of Christianity to temporal ambitions."[8]
  4. ↑ As said Hall about Christianity, "There is no other religion in the world in which there are so many discordant sects, each claiming a peculiar integrity of interpretation."[10]
  5. ↑ According to Massey, "all the Christian documents" about Jesus, which were allegedly written in the years following "his 'life' in the first century A.D.", were taken from "extremely ancient" Egyptian religious sources.[12]
  6. ↑ Hall stated: "There is no great teacher whose doctrines have been more intentionally misunderstood than those of Jesus."[14]
  7. ↑ Goodrick-Clarke wrote that "the very concept of the Masters" is the Rosicrucian idea of "invisible and secret adepts, working for the advancement of humanity."[17] And Tillett stated: "The concept of Masters or Mahatmas as presented by HPB involved a mixture of western and eastern ideas; she located most of them in India or Tibet. Both she and Colonel Olcott claimed to have seen and to be in communication with Masters. In Western occultism the idea of 'Supermen' has been found in such schools as... the fraternities established by de Pasqually and de Saint-Martin."[18]
  8. ↑ According to Schuré, Christian esotericism in the Gospels is revealed if to approach them from the standpoint of the "Essenian and Gnostic traditions."[22] Kuhn stated that the "Gospels" in ancient times were not "the biographies of one, or of any, living earthly person, but were held as the literary forms of a universal dramatical representation of the experience of our divine souls in the mortal body here on earth."[23]
  9. ↑ "Godfrey Higgins has discovered two references, one in the Midrashjoholeth and the other in the Abodazara (early Jewish commentaries on the Scriptures), to the effect that the surname of Joseph's family was Panther, for in both of these works it is stated that a man was healed 'in the name of Jesus ben Panther.'"[24]
  10. ↑ Levi in his book The Paradoxes of the Highest Science stated: "Jesus, like all great Hierophants, had a public and a secret doctrine."[27] Mahatma Kuthumi commented on this phrase ironically: "But he preached it a century before his birth."[2]
  11. ↑ Mahatma Kuthumi noted that "the man Jeshu was but a mortal like any of us."[28] Hall wrote that Jesus had been making "the miracles" like the legendary "Mahatmas of Asia".[29]
  12. ↑ Besant wrote that the "occult records" partially confirmed the narrations in the Gospels; they unfold before us the life of Jesus, freeing it from the myths.[31] Nevertheless, according to Kuhn, the information obtained with the help of clairvoyance is obviously not enough to confirm his real biography.[32]
  13. ↑ "Chrestes, Chrestos (Greek). Applied by the Greeks as a title of respect equivalent to 'the worthy.' Chrestes meant an interpreter of oracles. In the language of the Mysteries, a chrestos was a candidate or neophyte, and a christos (anointed) was an initiate. Christ is a mystical expression for the human inner god, while chrest is the good but as yet unregenerated nature."[34]
  14. ↑ Mahatma Kuthumi wrote: "It is religion that makes of man the selfish bigot, the fanatic that hates all mankind out of his own sect."[45]
  15. ↑ "Such a death is most improbable, for it was distinctly against Roman law as crucifixion was not a punishment meted out to civil prisoners, being reserved for robbers and murderers."[47]
  16. ↑ Nevertheless, Kuhn noted that while, from the orthodox point of view, the Old Testament expounds "ancient Jewish history and the New gives early Christian history," a certain minority of scientists have always expressed an opinion "that the Bible is only properly read as allegory."[48]
  17. ↑ Currently, many scientists, in particular, Wells "maintain the position that based on the available evidence, the existence of Jesus is a myth."[51] See also: Historicity of Jesus#Christ myth theory

References

  1. ↑ Index.
  2. 1 2 Price 1985.
  3. ↑ Theowiki.
  4. ↑ Kuhn 1992.
  5. ↑ Сенкевич 2012, p. 297.
  6. ↑ Blavatsky 1960, p. 176.
  7. ↑ Сенкевич 2012, p. 298.
  8. ↑ Hall 1937, p. 178.
  9. ↑ Blavatsky 1960, p. 175; Tyson 2006, p. 384.
  10. ↑ Hall 1937, p. 173.
  11. ↑ Blavatsky 1960, p. 179; Фесенкова 2001, p. 18.
  12. ↑ Kuhn 1990, p. 7.
  13. ↑ Blavatsky 1960, pp. 179–80.
  14. ↑ Hall 1937, p. 179.
  15. ↑ Blavatsky 1960, p. 180; Фесенкова 2001, p. 18.
  16. 1 2 Ellwood.
  17. ↑ Goodrick-Clarke 2004.
  18. ↑ Tillett 1986.
  19. ↑ Blavatsky 1960, p. 210; Дружинин 2012, p. 67.
  20. ↑ Blavatsky 1960, p. 179.
  21. ↑ Edge 1998, Ch. 3.
  22. ↑ Schuré 1921.
  23. ↑ Kuhn 1990, p. 9.
  24. ↑ Hall 1962.
  25. ↑ Blavatsky 1960, p. 189.
  26. ↑ Mead 2013.
  27. ↑ Levi 1996.
  28. ↑ Barker 1924, Letter 59.
  29. ↑ Hall 1937, p. 169.
  30. ↑ Blavatsky 1960, p. 189; Дружинин 2012, p. 68.
  31. ↑ Besant 2009, Ch. IV.
  32. ↑ Kuhn 1990, p. 31.
  33. ↑ Blavatsky 1960, p. 173; Дружинин 2012, p. 66.
  34. ↑ Glossary 1999, Chrestes.
  35. ↑ Blavatsky 1960, p. 215; Дружинин 2012, p. 67.
  36. ↑ Blavatsky 1960, p. 205.
  37. 1 2 Harris.
  38. ↑ Blavatsky 1960, p. 205; Дружинин 2012, p. 67.
  39. ↑ Blavatsky 1960, p. 189; Беренс 2003, p. 64.
  40. ↑ Blavatsky 1960, p. 204.
  41. ↑ Blavatsky 1960, p. 204; Дружинин 2012, p. 67.
  42. ↑ Blavatsky 1960, p. 190; Tyson 2006, p. 183.
  43. ↑ Blavatsky 1960, p. 201; Tyson 2006, p. 183.
  44. ↑ Cranston 1993.
  45. ↑ Barker 1924, Letter 10.
  46. 1 2 Дружинин 2012, p. 68.
  47. ↑ Hall 1937, p. 172.
  48. ↑ Kuhn 1990, p. 16.
  49. ↑ Blavatsky 1960, p. 173; Kuhn 1990, p. 16.
  50. ↑ Kuhn 1990, p. 17.
  51. ↑ Hao Chin.

Sources

In other languages
Translations
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.