RESUMÉ.
In reading the account of the life of Issa (Jesus Christ),
one is struck, on the one hand by the resemblance of certain
principal passages to accounts in the Old and New Testaments;
and, on the other, by the not less remarkable contradictions
which occasionally occur between the Buddhistic version and
Hebraic and Christian records.
To explain this, it is necessary to remember the epochs when
the facts were consigned to writing.
We have been taught, from our childhood, that the Pentateuch
was written by Moses himself, but the careful researches of
modern scholars have demonstrated conclusively, that at the time
of Moses, and even much later, there existed in the country
bathed by the Mediterranean, no other writing than the
hieroglyphics in Egypt and the cuniform inscriptions, found
nowadays in the excavations of Babylon. We know, however, that
the alphabet and parchment were known in China and India long
before Moses.
Let me cite a few proofs of this statement. We learn from the
sacred books of "the religion of the wise" that the
alphabet was invented in China in 2800 by Fou-si, who was the
first emperor of China to embrace this religion, the ritual and
exterior forms of which he himself arranged. Tao, the fourth of
the Chinese emperors, who is said to have belonged to this
faith, published moral and civil laws, and, in 2228, compiled a
penal code. The fifth emperor, Soune, proclaimed in the year of
his accession to the throne that "the religion of the
wise" should thenceforth be the recognized religion of the
State, and, in 2282, compiled new penal laws. His laws, modified
by the Emperor Vou-vange,--founder of the dynasty of the Tcheou
in 1122,--are those in existence to-day, and known under the
name of "Changements."
We also know that the doctrine of the Buddha Fô, whose true
name was Sakya-Muni, was written upon parchment. Fô-ism began
to spread in China about 260 years before Jesus Christ. In 206,
an emperor of the Tsine dynasty, who was anxious to learn
Buddhism, sent to India for a Buddhist by the name of Silifan,
and the Emperor Ming-Ti, of the Hagne dynasty, sent, a year
before Christ's birth, to India for the sacred books written by
the Buddha Sakya-Muni--the founder of the Buddhistic doctrine,
who lived about 1200 before Christ.
The doctrine of the Buddha Gauthama or Gothama, who lived 600
years before Jesus Christ, was written in the Pali language upon
parchment. At that epoch there existed already in India about
84,000 Buddhistic manuscripts, the compilation of which required
a considerable number of years.
At the time when the Chinese and the Hindus possessed already
a very rich written literature, the less fortunate or more
ignorant peoples who had no alphabet, transmitted their
histories from mouth to mouth, and from generation to
generation. Owing to the unreliability of human memory,
historical facts, embellished by Oriental imagination, soon
degenerated into fabulous legends, which, in the course of time,
were collected, and by the unknown compilers entitled "The
Five Books of Moses." As these legends ascribe to the
Hebrew legislator extraordinary divine powers which enabled him
to perform miracles in the presence of Pharaoh, the claim that
he was an Israelite may as well have been legendary rather than
historical.
The Hindu chroniclers, on the contrary, owing to their
knowledge of an alphabet, were enabled to commit carefully to
writing, not mere legends, but the recitals of recently occurred
facts within their own knowledge, or the accounts brought to
them by merchants who came from foreign countries.
It must be remembered, in this connection, that--in antiquity
as in our own days--the whole public life of the Orient was
concentrated in the bazaars. There the news of foreign events
was brought by the merchant-caravans and sought by the
dervishes, who found, in their recitals in the temples and
public places, a means of subsistence. When the merchants
returned home from a journey, they generally related fully
during the first days after their arrival, all they had seen or
heard abroad. Such have been the customs of the Orient, from
time immemorial, and are to-day.
The commerce of India with Egypt and, later, with Europe, was
carried on by way of Jerusalem, where, as far back as the time
of King Solomon, the Hindu caravans brought precious metals and
other materials for the construction of the temple. From Europe,
merchandise was brought to Jerusalem by sea, and there unloaded
in a port, which is now occupied by the city of Jaffa. The
chronicles in question were compiled before, during and after
the time of Jesus Christ.
During his sojourn in India, in the quality of a simple
student come to learn the Brahminical and Buddhistic laws, no
special attention whatever was paid to his life. When, however,
a little later, the first accounts of the events in Israel
reached India, the chroniclers, after committing to writing that
which they were told about the prophet, Issa,--viz., that
he had for his following a whole people, weary of the yoke of
their masters, and that he was crucified by order of Pilate,
remembered that this same Issa had only recently sojourned in
their midst, and that, an Israelite by birth, he had come to
study among them, after which he had returned to his country.
They conceived a lively interest for the man who had grown so
rapidly under their eyes, and began to investigate his birth,
his past and all the details concerning his existence.
The two manuscripts, from which the lama of the convent Himis
read to me all that had a bearing upon Jesus, are compilations
from divers copies written in the Thibetan language,
translations of scrolls belonging to the library of Lhassa and
brought, about two hundred years after Christ, from India,
Nepaul and Maghada, to a convent on Mount Marbour, near the city
of Lhassa, now the residence of the Dalai-Lama.
These scrolls were written in Pali, which certain lamas study
even now, so as to be able to translate it into the Thibetan.
The chroniclers were Buddhists belonging to the sect of the
Buddha Gothama. The details concerning Jesus, given in the
chronicles, are disconnected and mingled with accounts of other
contemporaneous events to which they bear no relation.
The manuscripts relate to us, first of all,--according to the
accounts given by merchants arriving from Judea in the same year
when the death of Jesus occurred--that a just man by the name of
Issa, an Israelite, in spite of his being acquitted twice by the
judges as being a man of God, was nevertheless put to death by
the order of the Pagan governor, Pilate, who feared that he
might take ad vantage of his great popularity to reestablish the
kingdom of Israel and expel from the country its conquerors.
Then follow rather incoherent communications regarding the
preachings of Jesus among the Guebers and other heathens. They
seem to have been written during the first years following the
death of Jesus, in whose career a lively and growing interest is
shown.
One of these accounts, communicated by merchant, refers to
the origin of Jesus and his family; another tells of the
expulsion of his partisans and the persecutions they had to
suffer.
Only at the end of the second volume is found the first
categorical affirmation of the chronicler. He says there that
Issa was a man blessed by God and the best of all; that it was
he in whom the great Brahma had elected to incarnate when, at a
period fixed by destiny, his spirit was required to, for a time,
separate from the Supreme Being.
After telling that Issa descended from poor Israelite
parents, the chronicler makes a little digression, for the
purpose of explaining, according to ancient accounts, who were
those sons of Israel.
I have arranged all the fragments concerning the life of Issa
in chronological order and have taken pains to impress upon them
the character of unity, in which they were absolutely lacking.
I leave it to the savans, the philosophers and the
theologians to search into the causes for the contradictions
which may be found between the "Life of Issa" which I
lay before the public and the accounts of the Gospels. But I
trust that everybody will agree with me in assuming that the
version which I present to the public, one compiled three or
four years after the death of Jesus, from the accounts of
eye-witnesses and contemporaries, has much more probability of
being in conformity with truth than the accounts of the Gospels,
the composition of which was effected at different epochs and at
periods much posterior to the occurrence of the events.
Before speaking of the life of Jesus, I must say a few words
on the history of Moses, who, according to the so-far most
accredited legend, was an Israelite. In this respect the legend
is contradicted by the Buddhists. We learn from the outset that
Moses was an Egyptian prince, the son of a Pharaoh, and that he
only was taught by learned Israelites. I believe that if this
important point is carefully examined, it must be admitted that
the Buddhist author may be right.
It is not my intent to argue against the Biblical legend
concerning the origin of Moses, but I think everyone reading it
must share my conviction that Moses could not have been a simple
Israelite. His education was rather that of a king's son, and it
is difficult to believe that a child introduced by chance into
the palace should have been made an equal with the son of the
sovereign. The rigor with which the Egyptians treated their
slaves by no means attests the mildness of their character. A
foundling certainly would not have been made the companion of
the sons of a Pharaoh, but would be placed among his servants.
Add to this the caste spirit so strictly observed in ancient
Egypt, a most salient point, which is certainly calculated to
raise doubts as to the truth of the Scriptural story.
And it is difficult to suppose that Moses had not received a
complete education. How otherwise could his great legislative
work, his broad views, his high administrative qualities be
satisfactorily explained?
And now comes another question: Why should he, a prince, have
attached himself to the Israelites? The answer seems to me very
simple. It is known that in ancient, as well as in modern times,
discussions were often raised as to which of two brothers should
succeed to the father's throne. Why not admit this hypothesis,
viz., that Mossa, or Moses, having an elder brother whose
existence forbade him to think of occupying the throne of Egypt,
contemplated founding a distinct kingdom.
It might very well be that, in view of this end, he tried to
attach himself to the Israelites, whose firmness of faith as
well as physical strength he had occasion to admire. We know,
indeed, that the Israelites of Egypt had no resemblance whatever
to their descendants as regards physical constitution. The
granite blocks which were handled by them in building the
palaces and pyramids are still in place to testify to this fact.
In the same way I explain to myself the history of the miracles
which he is said to have performed before Pharaoh.
Although there are no definite arguments for denying the
miracles which Moses might have performed in the name of God
before Pharaoh, I think it is not difficult to realize that the
Buddhistic statement sounds more probable than the Scriptural
gloss. The pestilence, the small-pox or the cholera must,
indeed, have caused enormous ravages among the dense population
of Egypt, at an epoch when there existed yet but very
rudimentary ideas about hygiene and where, consequently, such
diseases must have rapidly assumed frightful virulence.
In view of Pharaoh's fright at the disasters which befell
Egypt, Moses' keen wit might well have suggested to him to
explain the strange and terrifying occurrences, to his father,
by the intervention of the God of Israel in behalf of his chosen
people.
Moses was here afforded an excellent opportunity to deliver
the Israelites from their slavery and have them pass under his
own domination.
In obedience to Pharaoh's will--according to the Buddhistic
version--Moses led the Israelites outside the walls of the city;
but, instead of building a new city within reach of the capital,
as he was ordered, he left with them the Egyptian territory.
Pharaoh's indignation on learning of this infringement of his
commands by Moses, can easily be imagined. And so he gave the
order to his soldiers to pursue the fugitives. The geographical
disposition of the region suggests at once that Moses during his
flight must have moved by the side of the mountains and entered
Arabia by the way over the Isthmus which is now cut by the Suez
Canal.
Pharaoh, on the contrary, pursued, with his troops, a
straight line to the Red Sea; then, in order to overtake the
Israelites, who had already gained the opposite shore, he sought
to take advantage of the ebb of the sea in the Gulf, which is
formed by the coast and the Isthmus, and caused his soldiers to
wade through the ford. But the length of the passage proved much
greater than he had expected; so that the flood-tide set in when
the Egyptian host was half way across, and, of the army thus
overwhelmed by the returning waves, none escaped death.
This fact, so simple in itself, has in the course of the
centuries been transformed by the Israelites into a religious
legend, they seeing in it a divine intervention in their behalf
and a punishment which their God inflicted on their persecutors.
There is, moreover, reason to believe that Moses himself saw the
occurrence in this light. This, however, is a thesis which I
shall try to develop in a forthcoming work.
The Buddhistic chronicle then describes the grandeur and the
downfall of the kingdom of Israel, and its conquest by the
foreign nations who reduced the inhabitants to slavery.
The calamities which befell the Israelites, and the
afflictions that thenceforth embittered their days were,
according to the chronicler, more than sufficient reasons that
God, pitying his people and desirous of coming to their aid,
should descend on earth in the person of a prophet, in order to
lead them back to the path of righteousness.
Thus the state of things in that epoch justified the belief
that the coming of Jesus was signalized, imminent, necessary.
This explains why the Buddhistic traditions could maintain
that the eternal Spirit separated from the eternal Being and
incarnated in the child of a pious and once illustrious family,
Doubtless the Buddhists, in common with the Evangelists,
meant to convey by this that the child belonged to the royal
house of David; but the text in the Gospels, according to which
"the child was born from the Holy Spirit," admits of
two interpretations, while according to Buddha's doctrine, which
is more in conformity with the laws of nature, the spirit has
but incarnated in a child already born, whom God blessed and
chose for the accomplishment of His mission on earth.
The birth of Jesus is followed by a long gap in the
traditions of the Evangelists, who either from ignorance or
neglect, fail to tell us anything definite about his childhood,
youth or education. They commence the history of Jesus with his
first sermon, i.e., at the epoch, when thirty years of
age, he returns to his country.
All the Evangelists tell us concerning the infancy of Jesus
is marked by the lack of precision: "And the child grew,
and waxed strong in spirit, filled with wisdom; and the grace of
God was upon him," says one of the sacred authors (Luke 2,
40), and another: "And the child grew, and waxed strong in
spirit, and was in the deserts till the day of his sheaving unto
Israel." (Luke 1, 80.)
As the Evangelists compiled their writings a long time after
the death of Jesus, it is presumable that they committed to
writing only those accounts of the principal events in the life
of Jesus which happened to come to their knowledge.
The Buddhists, on the contrary, who compiled their chronicles
soon after the Passion occurred, and were able to collect the
surest information about everything that interested them, give
us a complete and very detailed description of the life of
Jesus.
In those unhappy times, when the struggle for existence seems
to have destroyed all thought of God, the people of Israel
suffered the double oppression of the ambitious Herod and the
despotic and avaricious Romans. Then, as now, the Hebrews put
all their hopes in Providence, whom they expected, would send
them an inspired man, who should deliver them from all their
physical and moral afflictions. The time passed, however, and no
one took the initiative in a revolt against the tyranny of the
rulers.
In that era of hope and despair, the people of Israel
completely forgot that there lived among them a poor Israelite
who was a direct descendant from their King David. This poor man
married a young girl who gave birth to a miraculous child.
The Hebrews, true to their traditions of devotion and respect
for the race of their kings, upon learning of this event went in
great numbers to congratulate the happy father and sec the
child. It is evident that Herod was informed of this occurrence.
He feared that this infant, once grown to manhood, might avail
himself of his prospective popularity to re-conquer the throne
of his ancestors. He sent out his men to seize the child, which
the Israelites endeavored to hide from the wrath of the king,
who then ordered the abominable massacre of the children, hoping
that Jesus would perish in this vast human hecatomb. But
Joseph's family had warning of the impending danger, and took
refuge in Egypt.
A short time afterward, they returned to their native
country. The child had grown during those journeyings, in which
his life was more than once exposed to danger. Formerly, as now,
the Oriental Israelites commenced the instruction of their
children at the age of five or six years. Compelled to
constantly hide him from the murderous King Herod, the parents
of Jesus could not allow their son to go out, and he, no doubt,
spent all his time in studying the sacred Scriptures, so that
his knowledge was sufficiently beyond what would naturally have
been expected of a boy of his age to greatly astonish the elders
of Israel. He had in his thirteenth year attained an age when,
according to Jewish law, the boy becomes an adult, has the right
to marry, and incurs obligations for the discharge of the
religious duties of a man.
There exists still, in our times, among the Israelites, an
ancient religious custom that fixes the majority of a youth at
the accomplished thirteenth year. From this epoch the youth
becomes a member of the congregation and enjoys all the rights
of an adult. Hence, his marriage at this age is regarded as
having legal force, and is even required in the tropical
countries. In Europe, however, owing to the influence of local
laws and to nature, which does not contribute here so powerfully
as in warm climates to the physical development, this custom is
no more in force and has lost all its former importance.
The royal lineage of Jesus, his rare intelligence and his
learning, caused him to be looked upon as an excellent match,
and the wealthiest and most respected Hebrews would fain have
had him for a son-in-law, just as even nowadays the Israelites
are very desirous of the honor of marrying their daughters to
the sons of Rabbis or scholars. But the meditative youth, whose
mind was far above anything corporeal, and possessed by the
thirst for knowledge, stealthily left his home and joined the
caravans going to India.
It stands to reason that Jesus Christ should have thought,
primarily, of going to India, first, because at that epoch Egypt
formed part of the Roman possessions; secondly, and principally,
because a very active commercial exchange with India had made
common report in Judea of the majestic character and unsurpassed
richness of the arts and sciences in this marvellous country, to
which even now the aspirations of all civilized peoples are
directed.
Here the Evangelists once more lose the thread of the
terrestrial life of Jesus. Luke says he "was in the deserts
till the day of his shewing unto Israel " (Luke 1, 80),
which clearly demonstrates that nobody knew where the holy youth
was until his sudden re-appearance sixteen years later.
Arrived in India, this land of marvels, Jesus began to
frequent the temples of the Djainites.
There exists until to-day, on the peninsula of Hindustan, a
sectarian cult under the name of Djainism. It forms a kind of
connecting link between Buddhism and Brahminism, and preaches
the destruction of all other beliefs, which, it declares, are
corroded by falsehood. It dates from the seventh century before
Jesus Christ and its name is derived from the word "djain"
(conqueror), which was assumed by its founders as expressive of
its destined triumph, over its rivals.
In sympathetic admiration for the spirit of the young man,
the Djainites asked him to stay with them; but Jesus left them
to settle in Djagguernat, where he devoted himself to the study
of treatises on religion, philosophy, etc. Djagguernat is one of
the chief sacred cities of Brahmins, and, at the time of Christ,
was of great religious importance. According to tradition, the
ashes of the illustrious Brahmin, Krishna, who lived in 1580 B.
C., are preserved there, in the hollow of a tree, near a
magnificent temple, to which thousands make pilgrimage every
year. Krishna collected and put in order the Vedas, which he
divided into four books--Richt, Jagour, Saman and Artafan;--in
commemoration of which great work he received the name of Vyasa
(he who collected and divided the Vedas), and he also compiled
the Vedanta and eighteen Puranas, which contain 400,000 stanzas.
In Djagguernat is also found a very precious library of
Sanscrit books and religious manuscripts.
Jesus spent there six years in studying the language of the
country and the Sanscrit, which enabled him to absorb the
religious doctrines, philosophy, medicine and mathematics. He
found much to blame in Brahminical laws and usages, and publicly
joined issue with the Brahmins, who in vain endeavored to
convince him of the sacred character of their established
customs. Jesus, among other things, deemed it extremely unjust
that the laborer should be oppressed and despised, and that he
should not only be robbed of hope of future happiness, but also
be denied the right to hear the religious services. He,
therefore, began preaching to the Sudras, the lowest caste of
slaves, telling them that, according to their own laws, God is
the Father of all men; that all which exists, exists only
through Him; that, before Him, all men are equal, and that the
Brahmins had obscured the great principle of monotheism by
misinterpreting Brahma's own words, and laying excessive stress
upon observance of the exterior ceremonials of the cult.
Here are the words in which, according to the doctrine of the
Brahmins, God Himself speaks to the angels: ''I have been from
eternity, and shall continue to be eternally. I am the first
cause of everything that exists in the East and in the West, in
the North and in the South, above and below, in heaven and in
hell. I am older than all things. I am the Spirit and the
Creation of the universe and also its Creator. I am
all-powerful; I am the God of the Gods, the King of the Kings; I
am Para-Brahma, the great soul of the universe."
After the world appeared by the will of Para-Brahma, God
created human beings, whom he divided into four classes,
according to their colors: white (Brahmins), red (Kshatriyas),
yellow (Vaisyas), and black (Sudras). Brahma drew the first from
his own mouth, and gave them for their appanage the
government of the world, the care of teaching men the laws, of
curing and judging them. Therefore do the Brahmins occupy only
the offices of priests and preachers, are expounders of the
Vedas, and must practice celibacy.
The second caste of Kshatriyas issued from the hand of
Brahma. He made of them warriors, entrusting them with the care
of defending society. All the kings, princes, captains,
governors and military men belong to this caste, which lives on
the best terms with the Brahmins, since they cannot subsist
without each other, and the peace of the country depends on the
alliance of the lights and the sword, of Brahma's temple and the
royal throne.
The Vaisyas, who constitute the third caste, issued from
Brahma's belly. They are destined to cultivate the ground, raise
cattle, carry on commerce and practice all kinds of trades in
order to feed the Brahmins and the Kshatriyas. Only on holidays
are they authorized to enter the temple and listen to the
recital of the Vedas; at all other times they must attend to
their business.
The lowest caste, that of the black ones, or Sudras, issued
from the feet of Brahma to be the humble servants and slaves of
the three preceding castes. They are interdicted from attending
the reading of the Vedas at any time; their touch contaminates a
Brahmin, Kshatriya, or even a Vaisya who conies in contact with
them. They are wretched creatures, deprived of all human rights;
they cannot even look at the members of the other castes, nor
defend themselves, nor, when sick, receive the attendance of a
physician. Death alone can deliver the Sudra from a life of
servitude; and even then, freedom can only be attained under the
condition that, during his whole life, he shall have served
diligently and without complaint some member of the privileged
classes. Then only it is promised that the soul of the Sudra
shall, after death, be raised to a superior caste.
If a Sudra has been lacking in obedience to a member of the
privileged classes, or has in any way brought their disfavor
upon him. self, he sinks to the rank of a pariah, who is
banished from all cities and villages and is the object of
general contempt, as an abject being who can only perform the
lowest kind of work.
The same punishment may also fall upon members of another
caste; these, however, may, through repentance, fasting and
other trials, re-habilitate themselves in their former caste;
while the unfortunate Sudra, once expelled from his, has lost it
forever.
From what has been said above, it is easy to explain why the
Vaisyas and Sudras were animated with adoration for Jesus, who,
in spite of the threats of the Brahmins and Kshatriyas, never
forsook those poor people. In his sermons Jesus not only
censured the system by which man was robbed of his right to be
considered as a human being, while an ape or a piece of marble
or metal was paid divine worship, but he attacked the very life
of Brahminism, its system of gods, its doctrine and its "trimurti"
(trinity), the angular stone of this religion.
Para-Brahma is represented with three faces on a single head.
This is the "trimurti" (trinity), composed of Brahma
(creator), Vishnu (conservator), and Siva (destroyer).
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), *
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 peoples' 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
re-establishment of the throne of Israel, and that he suffered
himself to he 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 re-establish 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 re-establish 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 pre-arrangement 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
hast 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, re-construct 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.
