Did Jesus travel to India?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If Jesus journeyed east to India and elsewhere, traditional Christianity has neglected a vital aspect of his life and ministry. Are the Gospels partial biographies that need to be supplemented by outside sources that speak of Jesus' Oriental adventures? Has the church locked itself into a flawed view of Jesus? To assess these concerns, we need to test the claims of the documents discussed in the last section. We will apply the historical tests of integrity, authenticity, and veracity to Notovitch's text. We will commence with the criterion of veracity. What is the nature of the text itself? Does it appear to be true to fact?
Edgar J. Goodspeed, an expert on ancient manuscripts, observes that "the whole cast of the book is vague and elusive."[1] He also notes, "It presents no difficulties, no problems--whereas any really ancient work newly discovered bristles with novelties and obscurities."[2] We saw this especially in the ferment of scholarly disagreement that ensued after the discovery of both the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Nag Hammadi texts. Speaking of the text, Goodspeed continues: "Here the message of Issa is a pallid and colorless morality; amiable and unobjectionable enough, but devoid of the flashes of insight and touches of genius that mark the early gospels."[3]
Goodspeed also recognizes that the text "identifies itself with no recognizable type of primitive type of primitive thought," although it "shows a superficial acquaintance with the leading New Testament" accounts.[4] As we argued in the last section, it is more of a hodgepodge, or theological patch-quilt, than a well-integrated belief system.
The veracity of the document is also called into question when we consider some historical inaccuracies concerning world religions. Per Beskow, a Swedish New Testament scholar, points out that the reference to "the god Djaine" (5:2) discloses "a considerable lack of knowledge about Indian religions." He continues:
The Jains, or Jainas, do not believe in any god at all, but in certain jinas ("Conquerors"), who are enlightened spiritual leaders. The a in Jain comes from the same phonetic law that makes the [Hindu] worshippers of Shiva into Shavias and the [Hindu] worshippers of Vishnu into Vaishnavas.[5]
There is no "god Djaine."
The fact that "The Life of Saint Issa" would err so terribly concerning the Jain religion does not bode well for its overall veracity.[6] Nor does another error concerning religious belief.
The text was purportedly reconstructed from manuscripts in a Buddhist monastery and speaks more highly of Buddhism than any other religion. It even speaks of Issa as having been "elected" by Buddha "to spread his holy word" (6:4). Buddha seems to be interchangeable with God in this case. It also speaks of Buddhists worshiping Brahma, which is an odd combination of Hinduism and Buddhism. It also speaks of a jealous Creator God who can punish and forgive sin and hates idols. This has little to do with most of historic Buddhism, which is either atheistic, agnostic, or pantheistic and abounds in images of the Buddha as proper objects of religious veneration and contemplation.[7] The "Buddhism" of the text looks more like a syncretistic creation of an attempt to graft elements of Buddhism onto Judaism than it does to any identifiable Buddhism of that time in history.[8]
It is instructive to know that theories relating Christianity to Buddhism were very much in vogue when Notovitch published his Unknown Life of Jesus Christ. Many Westerners sought to synthesize the two religions in novel ways. Historian Carl Jackson, in reviewing this phenomenon, says that Notovitch "may be said to have carried the controversy to its ultimate reductio ad absurdum" by his claim that the supposed resemblances between Christianity and Buddhism are accounted for by Jesus studying Buddhism with Buddhists.[9] The attempt to link Buddhism and Christianity was appealing to many, but not based on fact.
It is also rather odd that while certain commonly known English names take on exotic spellings (supposedly following the language of the text), such as Issa for Jesus (which is faithful to the Tibetan),[10] Mossa for Moses, and Romeles for Romans, Pontius Pilate remains unchanged.[11] This inconsistency is another strike against the text being historically believable.
So we find several reasons to question the veracity of "The Life of Saint Issa," in light of historical facts, whether from the New Testament or from other sources.
Concerning its authenticity, we have only one verse in the text claiming that the account was written by "the merchants" who presumably accompanied Jesus on his trek from Israel to the East. These merchants are not named, and their identity is never mentioned in the entire text. Neither is there any strong external tradition as to the text's authorship, as we find for the New Testament Gospels. We are left in the dark as to where the merchants were from (India or Palestine?),[12] how they gained their facts, or their abilities to record the facts--assuming they wrote the text at all!
So far, we have found substantial reason to doubt the veracity and authenticity of this controversial text. However, the greatest difficulties are in regard to the matter of its integrity. Do we have reason to believe this text has been accurately transmitted over the centuries? Or is it a modern invention, a mere forgery?
F. Max Muller (1823-1900), the great Orientalist of the nineteenth century and translator and editor of the multivolumed Sacred Books of the East, subjected the Issa thesis to critical scrutiny soon after its publication. Lest anyone accuse him of ill intentions,[13] in 1882, 12 years before Notovitch's publication, he had written that he "would be extremely grateful if anybody would point out to me the historical channels through which Buddhism influenced early Christianity," because he had been searching in vain for this his entire life.[14] Muller thought that if the Issa text were legitimate, it would help establish the historicity of Jesus, despite the text's difference from the New Testament accounts.[15]
Writing in 1894, Muller found it exceedingly difficult to believe that a text of this importance was not listed in the Kandjur and Tandjur collections, the "excellent catalogues of manuscripts and books of the Buddhists in Tibet and China." He found it "impossible or next to impossible...that this Sutra of Issa, composed in the first century of our era, should not have found a place either in the Kandjur or in the Tandjur."[16] Notovitch responded by saying that those catalogs didn't exhaust the manuscript resources at his disposal at the Himis monastery.[17] Yet how plausible is it that Issa would not be well-known in India if, in fact, Jesus had actually been there? We would expect this text to be listed in the major catalogs if Issa had the impact in India that "The Life of Saint Issa" claims that he did. We should also remember Notovitch's lack of scholarly standing and Muller's world renown.[18] Muller is the authority.
This brings us to Notovitch's account itself. Even if we take him at face value, we are quite distant from the supposed original writing of the Issa text. Notovitch's own words make this clear:
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 [sic] 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.[19]
In light of this, Goodspeed notes that Notovitch's claims are extremely unscholarly and improbable:
It is evident that the scholar's desire to see the manuscript of the work, or failing that to see a photograph of it or a part of it, or at least to have precise directions about how and where to find it (its place and number in the Himis library) is not in this case to be satisfied.[20]
We are at least three times removed from the manuscript. Notovitch tells us that first, the lama read aloud from the manuscripts; second, the interpreter interpreted; and third, Notovitch recorded it. But Notovitch also admits that he "arranged all the fragments concerning the life of Issa in chronological order and [took] pains to impress upon them the character of unity, in which they were absolutely lacking."[21] Goodspeed complains that "this is just what a scholar would not have done; he would wish to present the fragments just as the manuscripts had them, unaffected by his own views and tastes."[22]
While it is not impossible for a nonscholar to stumble across a valuable manuscript, Notovich's testimony loses credibility given the many inaccuracies already noted and considering the fact that Notovitch was "a man of no known attainments in any direction, certainly not in the direction of biblical history and criticism."[23] Notovitch's lack of scholarship, or even basic biblical knowledge, is especially evident when he describes the Gospel of Luke as saying that Jesus "was in the deserts until the day of his showing in Israel" (1:80). This, he believes, proves that no one knew where he had gone until he reappeared 16 years later.[24] However, this biblical reference has nothing to do with Jesus, but with John the Baptist! (Whether anyone claims John went to India, I do not know.)
Even more problems are evident in Notovitch's tale. He describes the manuscripts about Issa as scrolls or books, when, as Per Beskow points out, "Tibetan books are neither scrolls nor bound in our way. They consist of oblong leaves, imitating palm leaves; they are kept loose between wooden plates, and the whole is kept wrapped in a piece of cloth."[25] Notovitch was wrong again.
Let us bring together the facts on Issa and Notovitch. The Issa of the manuscript bears little resemblance to the Jesus Christ of the Gospels. The doctrine of Notovitch's text is a sloppy syncretism that cannot fully support a New Age platform. Concerning the tests of historicity: The text contains several obvious falsehoods regarding Jainism and Buddhism. We have no idea who supposedly wrote the text outside of a vague reference to unidentified "merchants."
Even if the text is what Notovitch claims, it is textually uncertain with regard to integrity because of 1) its being transcribed through a translator, 2) its unavailability for scholarly inspection, and 3) Notovitch's admittedly substantial reworking of the original material.
ANOTHER GOSPEL FORGERY
Beyond these considerable problems, several witnesses came forth shortly after the publication of The Unknown Life of Christ, who claim that Notovitch never discovered the manuscript. In a finely detailed article published in a scholarly journal called The Nineteenth Century, in April 1896, Professor J. Archibald Douglas recounts his trip to the Himis monastery to check up on Notovitch's claims.
Douglas says he was open-minded and initially expected to confirm Notovitch's discovery. He seems to have had no personal or monetary motive to discredit Notovitch.
Douglas begins by agreeing that Notovitch visited the monastery, noting that the chief lama remembered several European gentlemen visiting in 1887 and 1888, which could very well have included Notovitch, a Russian.[26] But Douglas notes that Notovitch's name does not appear on the list of travelers kept at the bungalow in the city of Leh, where Notovitch said he stayed. Douglas did find that a Notovitch was treated there--not for a broken leg, but for a toothache.[27]
A translator was enlisted by Douglas to read extracts from Notovitch's book to the chief lama, in order to gain his response. The lama's comments were recorded in a statement signed by the lama, Douglas, and the translator, Shahmwell Joldan, late postmaster of Ladakh.
In the document, reprinted in the journal, the lama contradicts all of Notovitch's major assertions. When asked about the Issa document, the Chief Superior Lama replied:
I have been for forty-two years a Lama, and am well acquainted with all the well-known Buddhist books and manuscripts, and I have never heard of one which mentions the name of Issa, and it is my firm and honest belief that none exists. I have inquired of our principal Lamas in other monasteries of Tibet, and they are not acquainted with any books or manuscripts which mention the name of Issa.[28]
When asked if the name Issa was held in high respect by Buddhists, the lama replied, "They know nothing even of his name; none of the Lamas has ever heard it, save through missionaries and European sources."[29] The lama further denied that any Westerner had stayed there to nurse a broken leg (contra Notovitch)[30]; he denied having spoken with Notovitch about the religions of the ancient Egyptians, Assyrians, and people of Israel (contra Notovitch) and even denied knowing anything about these religions[31]; he likewise denied that the monastery contained any Buddhist writings in the Pali language (contra Notovitch).[32] Beskow confirms this, saying (contra Notovitch) that "Pali, which is the sacred language of Theravada Buddhism, has never been used in Tibet, and the Tibetan translations have usually been done from Sanskrit or from Chinese."[33]
Douglas reports that when parts of Notovitch's book were read to the lama, he burst out with, "Lies, lies, nothing but lies,"[34] and on another occasion asked Douglas if Notovitch could be punished by law for his untruths.[35]
Douglas also questions Notovitch's reference to using a resident (shikari) from a nearby village as an interpreter, because such a person is always a simple peasant, unable to handle the theological and philosophical concepts found in Notovitch's book.[36]
In response to these charges, Notovitch later claimed that the lama lied to Douglas because he was afraid the precious manuscripts would be stolen by Westerners; only Notovitch's "Eastern diplomacy" put him on the good side of the lama.[37] This is very unlikely. Even if the lama had confessed to the existence of such a manuscript, he would not have needed to reveal its location in the large collection. He could certainly have refused to show it, sell it, or donate it to foreigners. I also assume that the monasteries had adequate means to keep their precious documents secure. Further, if the monks were so reticent, how did Notovitch, visiting there for the very first time, gain access to the manuscripts, despite his "Eastern diplomacy"? We should remember that Douglas was accompanied by the postmaster of Ladakh--someone surely on better terms with its citizens than Notovitch, a total stranger.
Elizabeth Clare Prophet tries to strengthen the case that the monks feared the manuscripts would be stolen. She quoted from a passage in The Cultural Heritage of Ladakh to the effect that because the Himis monastery attracted so many visitors, the monks had a condescending, if not contemptuous attitude toward them and seemed convinced that all the foreigners would steal from them if possible. The book goes on to say that the monastery experienced some quite serious losses of property "in recent years," which were being investigated when the authors were there. (It was found, though, that foreigners were not responsible.[38]) This information, Prophet avers, lends credence to Notovitch's idea that his own "Eastern diplomacy," not possessed by Douglas, won him a precious peek at the manuscripts.
This argument reveals at least three serious weaknesses. First, the reference to supposedly stolen property is only in "recent years." The Notovitch incident dates to 1887, which is presumably not "recent." Second, the original quote from The Cultural Heritage of Ladakh goes on to mention something crucial omitted by Prophet: that "Hemis [sic] suffers greatly from the absence of its head lama."[39] It is just such a head lama who plays a prominent role in both Notovitch's and Douglas's accounts. Surely, the Himis of today is different enough from that of 1887 to render Prophet's selective quotation moot with regard to defending Notovitch! Third, the very book she cites concerning Himis and the region of Ladakh has absolutely no reference to Notovitch, Jesus, Christ, or Issa in its index. If the Notovitch story had any credibility, wouldn't it be mentioned in this source? This is a telling omission, indeed.
We must consider one more item before giving a verdict on Notovitch: Could the Issa story have been created out of his imagination if he named the specific site at which he claimed to have found the manuscript? Prophet[40] and Notovitch himself[41] say it is unlikely that a liar would make such particular claims. Is it really?
Notovitch could have easily realized that very few people have access to an obscure Tibetan monastery. He could have expected that his book would be in print for many months, while he pocketed considerable royalties, before someone checked him out. (This, in fact, is exactly what happened.) He may have even made contingency plans to use if he were challenged, such as the "Eastern diplomacy" response. Furthermore, he himself backtracked after Douglas's and Muller's criticism. In the preface to the edition of his book reprinted by Prophet, he confessed that there was probably no one manuscript about Issa but that the story had been gathered from various books in the monastery[42]--a revision of his earlier comments.[43]
So what is the verdict on Notovitch and his Unknown Life of Jesus Christ? Beskow calls his "discovery" the "best known Gospel forgery of modern times."[44] Goodspeed, Douglas, and Muller agree. Albert Schweitzer calls it a "fictitious" life of Christ and "a bare-faced swindle and an impudent invention."[45] This verdict is, I believe, accurate.
Nevertheless, Elizabeth Clare Prophet's book The Lost Years of Jesus adds three other witnesses who claim to have seen the documents and, in the case of one Swami Abhedananda, made a translation of them. The reader can consult her arguments for the details, but at least four salient and stubborn facts remain.[46]
First, the Issa manuscripts remain unavailable for scholarly inspection. Prophet has not shown otherwise. In addition to Prophet's arguments, Fida Hassnain, an Islamic professor and author of A Search for the Historical Jesus (1994), also claims to have visited the Himis monastery several times in search of the Issa manuscript. Although he never saw the manuscript, he claims that he found in a local church a journal entry dated 1890 by a Moravian missionary named Dr. Marx which mentioned Notovitch's visit to the monastery and his discovery of the manuscript.
Hassnain says he photographed two pages from Marx's diary and translated them from German. He claims that the diary mentions Notovitch as "a Russian traveler who broke his leg at Hemis in Ladakh, and who was nursed by the Moravian Mission doctors. Mention is made of the claim of Notovitch that he had seen Tibetan scrolls about Jesus in the Hemis monastery."[47]
Although Hassnain includes several photographs of the monastery in his book, strangely, he does not provide a photograph of this journal entry. The entry mentioned only Notovitch's claim to have seen the Tibetan manuscripts. Dr. Marx says nothing of having himself seen the manuscript. If this diary is authentic (which is very hard to establish given the lack of evidence), it could be that Notovitch simply lied to Marx. Given what we have found in this section, this is very likely. Furthermore, the supposed diary entry contradicts the testimony of the Chief Superior Lama interviewed by Archibald Douglas.
Hassnain's claim adds another small piece to the Notovitch puzzle. However, it fails to establish either the actual existence of the supposedly lost Tibetan manuscript or its historical reliability as a source about Jesus Christ.
Second, no one has come up with an adequate picture of the text that reveals its distinctive features and unique identity.[48] Prophet includes a photo of a monk holding some kind of scroll with the caption, "These books say our Jesus was here,"[49] but this hardly qualifies as sound evidence, especially since books is the wrong word to use (as noted above).
Third, Prophet's and Hassnain's anecdotal claims do nothing to rehabilitate the text's dubious historicity and Notovitch's inaccuracies. The arguments given above stand fast.
Fourth, and most importantly, the reliability of "The Life of Saint Issa" must be compared with the biblical record of Jesus. The New Testament marshals impressive credentials. It has historical integrity, which Issa lacks. It has historical authenticity, which Issa lacks. In the bright light of this threefold argument for the New Testament, it is safe to say that the burden of proof is on "The Life of Saint Issa"--a burden that is very difficult to bear. To put it another way, 5366 ancient Greek New Testament manuscripts in the hand are worth more than (at most) one inaccessible and idiosyncratic manuscript in the Tibetan bush.
Given the above considerations, even if it could be established that a genuine manuscript of "The Life of Saint Issa" exists, this, in itself, would not prove it to be true to fact. Such a manuscript could easily be a legendary fabrication which makes use of biblical materials about Christ but also interweaves them with non-Christian and nonhistorical teachings. Ron Rhodes, who also doubts that the Issa manuscript exists, makes this case strongly:
Christians acknowledge that news of Jesus eventually reached India and Tibet as a result of the missionary efforts of the early church. It is conceivable that when devotees of other religions heard about Jesus, they tried to modify what they heard to make it appear that Jesus and his teachings were compatible with their own belief systems. It is possible that sometime between the first and nineteenth centuries these unreliable legends were recorded on scrolls and circulated among the converts in India. This would not be unlike the distorted versions of the life of Jesus that emerged among the early Gnostics and were ecorded in the Gnostic gospels.[50]
DID JESUS DIE IN INDIA?
While Notovitch's "discovery" leaves the body of Issa decomposing in Palestine, other New Age revisionists have him surviving the crucifixion and retiring in India. After dying there, he was supposedly interred in a tomb in Kashmir. Ironically, one article defending this view begins by citing Notovitch as a source, even though his account of Issa does not permit Jesus returning to India.[51]
Before dealing with these claims, we should again keep in mind the case for the historical reliability of the New Testament. Any historical claim that contradicts this record in any important way needs to assume the burden of proof. The New Testament, of course, records that Jesus died on the cross, was buried, rose again, and ascended to heaven. He was a man born to die and emphasized his destiny throughout his ministry in different ways. Therefore, to claim that he did not die on the cross is to question the entire biblical portrait of Jesus. But how is this done?
One notion is that Jesus was crucified but did not die on the cross. He only appeared to die. He was brought to a tomb where he revived, only to leave Palestine and head eastward. This is a new twist on an old idea called the "swoon theory."
First, it is maintained by some that Jesus was not on the cross long enough to have died from crucifixion. Richard Walters says, "Writings on crucifixion state that, when the person crucified was in normal health, in no case did death occur within 12 hours." He concludes that "it is improbable that Jesus died after just three hours on the cross."[52] Second, some claim that Jesus was drugged when someone put a sponge up to his mouth to drink. This caused the appearance of death that deceived those present.[53] Third, the fact that blood spurted out from Jesus' side when it was pierced by the Roman's sword is thought to be another indication he was still alive.[54] Kersten and Gruber further argue that the nature of the shroud of Turin provides evidence that Jesus did not die on the cross.[55]
Before moving to the claims of Jesus' tomb being in India, we should briefly address these arguments.
As a general point, one has to wonder why those who trust the Gospel accounts enough to affirm that Jesus was crucified depart from the narratives when they clearly report that Jesus was dead as dead could ever be. Why believe at one point and doubt at another? If critics do not establish sufficient criteria for their doubts, their rejection of Jesus' death is simply arbitrary.
More specifically, first, there was sufficient time for Jesus to die on the cross. We must not view the crucifixion in isolation from what preceded it. As Michael Green notes:
It is incredible that Jesus, who had not eaten or slept before his execution, who was weakened by a loss of blood through the most brutal flogging [see 1 Peter 2:24], who was pierced in both hands and feet, could have survived unaided had he been alive when taken down from the cross.[56]
Jesus was so weakened from his beatings that he was unable to carry his cross all the way to Golgotha, the execution site (Matthew 27:32). The authors of a technical article called "On the Physical Death of Jesus Christ," in the Journal of the American Medical Association, remarked that the time of survival for Roman crucifixions "ranged from three or four hours to three or four days and appears to have been inversely related to the severity of the scourging."[57]
Pilate showed surprise that Jesus died so rapidly (Mark 15:44), but he did not question that Jesus was really dead. The Romans were no beginners when it came to crucifixion. The squad of four soldiers broke the legs of the two men crucified with Jesus (a practice that would hasten death), but did not bother to break Jesus' legs because they saw he was already expired.
Second, the theory that Jesus arranged to be given some potion to feign death is problematic in several ways. The Gospel of John reports that Jesus was given a drink in full view of the Roman guards before he died (John 19:28, 29). It was their job to be executioners, not accessories to a hoax. They had a vested interest in being accurate coroners because "had the centurion, had the governor made a mistake over the execution of a messianic pretender, their jobs and probably their lives would have been on the line."[58] Surely, they would have been wise to such a ploy. Moreover, if we assume that Jesus somehow arranged for his last-minute rescue, he is no less than a grand impostor and not worthy of any respect, because he preached the necessity of his own death. We might then say that Jesus rivaled Houdini, but we could never view him with religious veneration, let alone worship.
Third, the fact that blood and water came from Jesus' side is positive evidence for his death. The Roman soldiers pierced his side because they wanted to make doubly sure he was dead. This was a standard practice to ensure death.[59] What followed confirmed Jesus' death, as explained in the just-mentioned article in the Journal of the American Medical Association. Here is the conclusion of the authors:
Clearly, the weight of historical and medical evidence indicates that Jesus was dead before the wound to his side was inflicted and supports the traditional view that the spear, thrust between his right ribs, probably perforated not only the right lung, but also the pericardium and heart and thereby ensured his death. Accordingly, interpretations based on the assumption that Jesus did not die on the cross appear to be at odds with modern medical knowledge.[60]
The view that the shroud of Turin somehow gives evidence that Jesus did not die on the cross must clear two hugh hurdles. First, the authenticity of the shroud is far more in doubt than the reliability of the New Testament, which clearly indicates that Jesus died on the cross. The crucifixion is also corroborated by secular historians. Second, even if the shroud is the death wrapping of Jesus, it is highly unlikely that this artifact could 2000 years later, establish that Jesus did not die on the cross. If the shroud is authentic, the evidence points in the other direction: Jesus died and was raised from the dead.[61]
Various authors have spoken of legends in Eastern lands claiming Jesus as their own. A tomb thought by some to contain Jesus' remains is in Kashmir, India, supposedly occupied by a mysterious Yuz Asaf.[62] But here again, a heavy burden of proof rests on such a revisionist view, given the historical reliability of the New Testament and considering the fact that Jesus could not have lived through the crucifixion. The resurrected and ascended Christ proclaims in the book of Revelation, "I was dead, and behold I am alive for ever and ever!" (Revelation 1:18). Paul is confident that "since Christ was raised from the dead, he cannot die again; death no longer has mastery over him" (Romans 6:9).
Those who claim that Jesus ended up in India must also explain the existence of the primitive church's faith in the resurrected and ascended Lord. And what sort of a teacher would Jesus be if he escaped to India while permitting an entire religion to be hinged on a threefold falsehood--namely, his death, resurrection, and ascension?
But the real evidence against Jesus' death in India is a developed argument for his bodily resurrection and ascension. Jesus cannot be both rotting in Kashmir and ruling in heaven.
[1]Edgar J. Goodspeed, Modern Apocrypha (Boston: The Beacon Press, 1956), 8.
[2]Ibid.
[3]Ibid.
[4]Ibid.
[5]Per Beskow, Strange Tales About Jesus: A Survey of Unfamiliar Gospels (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985), 59.
[6]For more on Jainism, see Walter Kaufmann, Religion in Four Dimensions: Existential, Aesthetic, Historical, Comparative (New York: Reader's Digest Press, 1976), 297-301. Kaufman does point out that the founder of Jainism is sometimes worshiped, but this goes against his stated teachings. Jainism is primarily known as athestic, or at least as a nonworshiping agnosticism. God, if there be one, is not the prime focus of religious devotion. Therefore, the statement "the god of the Djaines" is not an accurate summary of their beliefs because the role of deity in Jainism is peripheral at best. It is not known as a monotheistic religion.
[7]Later Buddhist sects such as Pure Land Buddhism appeal to a Buddha figure as savior, but this comes hundreds of years after the time period described in "The Life of Issa."
[8]See Arid Romarheim, Various Views of Jesus Christ in New Religious Movements--A Typological Outline (unpublished manuscript), 12-13. This is available from Christian Research Institute, Box 500, San Juan Capistrano, CA 92693-0500.
[9]Carl Jackson, Oriental Religions and American Thought (Westport, CN: Greenwood Press, 1981), 149-50.
[10]See Beskow, 58.
[11]See F. Max Muller, "The Alleged Sojourn of Christ in India" The Nineteenth Century, no. CCX11 (October 1894), 518.
[12]Ibid. Muller thought it very unlikely that the same "Jewish merchants who arrived in India immediately after the Crucifixion knew not only what had happened to Christ in Palestine, but also what had happened to Jesus, or Issa, while he spent fifteen years of his life among the Brahman." Notovitch responded that the merchants were indigenous Indians who had returned from Palestine on business. See Nicholas Notovitch in Elizabeth Clare Prophet, The Lost Years of Jesus (Livingstone, MT: Summit University Press, 1984), 96.
[13]As does Holger Kersten, Jesus Lived in India (Longmead, England: Element Book, Ltd., 1986), 36-37. Kersten's response is little more than an attack on Muller's character. He does not refute Muller's arguments.
[14]Max Muller, India, What Can it Teach Us? (London, 1883), 279; quoted in Albert Schweitzer, The Quest for the Historical Jesus (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1973), 291.
[15]Muller, "The Alleged Sojourn," 518. Muller did not adequately understand, it seems, the vast differences between Issa and Jesus; nevertheless, his comment shows that he was not predisposed to reject the document as spurious without giving it a fair chance.
[16]Ibid.
[17]Notovitch in Prophet, 94.
[18]As an appendix to his article, Muller included a letter to him from an English woman familiar with the Himis monastery who wrote from Leh, Ladakh, on June 29, 1894. It claimed that Notovitch's story was a complete fabrication (Muller, "The Alleged Sojourn," 521-22. A more detailed case for fabrication will be made below.
[19]Nicholas Notovitch, The Unknown Life,, 226.
[20]Goodspeed, 9.
[21]Notovitch, 229.
[22]Goodspeed, 10.
[23]From a review of The Unknown Life of Jesus Christ, in The Biblical World 4, no. 2 (August 1894): 147. No author is cited.
[24]Notovitch, 229.
[25]Beskow, 121.
[26]J. Archibald Douglas, "The Chief Lama of Himis on the Alleged 'Unknown Life of Christ,'" The Nineteenth Century 230 (April 1896), 668-69.
[27]Ibid., 669.
[28]Ibid., 671.
[29]Ibid., 672.
[30]Ibid., 671.
[31]Ibid., 671-72.
[32]Ibid., 672.
[33]Beskow, 59.
[34]Douglas, 672.
[35]Ibid., 669-70.
[36]Ibid., 674.
[37]Notovitch in Prophet, 91-92.
[38]David L. Snellgrove and Tadeusz Skorupski, The Cultural Heritage of Ladakh--Volume One: Central Ladakh (Boulder, CO; Prajna Press, 1977), 127; quoted in Prophet, 37-38.
[39]Snellgrove and Skorupski, 127.
[40]Prophet, 35-36.
[41]Notovitch in Prophet, 93.
[42]Ibid., 94.
[43]Notovitch, 151-52.
[44]Beskow, 58.
[45]Schweitzer, 328.
[46]Beskow makes this comment about one of the supposed other witnesses of the manuscript: Professor Nicholas Roerich, painter and amateur archaeologist, traveled in Ladakh in the 1920s and believed that he had found traces of The Life of Saint Issa. Unfortunately, his examples from living folk traditions lend no added reliability, for the first part of his account is taken literally from Notovitch's Life of Saint Issa, chapters 5-13 (only extracts, but with all the verses in the right order). It is followed by "another version" (93-94), taken from chapter 16 of Downing's Aquarian Gospel. There is a vague possibility that visiting enthusiasts from Europe had already spread these stories to Ladakh, and that they had taken root in popular belief. But Roerich's literal quotations rather suggest that he inserted them only because he found them attractive. He was of a romantic nature and seems not to have taken a great interest in more tangible facts (62-63).
[47]Fida Hassnain, A Search for the Historical Jesus: From Apocryphal, Buddhist, Islamic, and Sanskrit Sources (Bath, UK: Gateway Books, 1994), 23.
[48]For instance, the mostly Gnostic Nag Hammadi manuscripts have been photographically reproduced in scholarly volumes in the original Coptic language.
[49]Prophet, 312.
[50]Ron Rhodes, The Counterfeit Christ of the New Age Movement (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1990), 55.
[51]Richard Walters, "Christ, Christian, Krishna," New Frontier, December 1988, 5.
[52]Ibid., 7.
[53]Ibid.
[54]Ibid.
[55]Holger Kersten and Elmar R. Gruber, The Jesus Conspiracy: The Turin Shroud and the Truth About the Resurrection (Rockport, MA: Element Books, 1994). For two negative reviews of their claims, see Eugene O. Bowser's review in Library Journal, June 5, 1994, 72; and Gary Young's review in Booklist, June 1 and 15, 1994, 1732.
[56]Michael Green, The Empty Cross of Jesus (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1984), 93. On the speed of Jesus' death, see also James Charlesworth, Jesus Within Judaism (New York: Doubleday, 1988), 122-23.
[57]William D. Edwards, Wesley J. Gabel, Floyd E. Hosmer, "On the Physical Death of Jesus Christ," Journal of the American Medical Association 255, no. 11 (March 21, 1986): 1460.
[58]Green, 93-94.
[59]William Lane Craig, Knowing the Truth about the Resurrection (Ann Arbor, MI: Servant Books, 1988), 33.
[60]Edwards, et al., 1463.
[61]See Kenneth E. Stevenson and Gary R. Habermas, The Shroud and the Controversy (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1990).
[62]Walters, 45; Kersten, Jesus Died in India. 179ff. For further criticism of this view, see Beskow, 63-64, 122-24.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright © 2009 Karma2Grace.org All Rights Reserved
EzWeb by TeknaLight
http://www.karma2grace.org/page.asp?pg=78
venerdì 28 maggio 2010
THE LOST YEARS OF JESUS
The Lost Years of Jesus
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Telugu Lost Years of Jesus
We all love secrets, especially when we are the recipients of a particularly juicy one. And the more significant the subject matter, the more precious the secret. Hidden wisdom is a scarce and treasured commodity that elevates the initiated into rarefied realms. What the masses have lost, the knowers have found. Blessed are the knowers who see through convention to reality--those who solve the mystery of "the lost years of Jesus." Many people entranced by the new spirituality embrace a Jesus unknown to traditional Christians: a world traveler.
The conventional Christian understanding of Jesus places him in Jewish sandals worn only in ancient Palestine. The Christ came to the Jewish people, as promised by the prophets, to mend the lame, feed the poor, raise the dead, proclaim the kingdom, obey the Father, die as a ransom for many, and be raised from the dead as the final demonstration of his unique mission and deity. Before his ascension, Jesus charged his disciples to make disciples of all the nations (Matthew 28:18-20; Acts 1:8), yet his own earthly ministry was limited to his homeland, Palestine.
In the biblical understanding, Jesus need not be a world traveler to be the Savior of the world. Matthew records Jesus' trip to Egypt as an infant, but the significance of this flight from Herod's sword is explained as a fulfillment of the prophecy, "Out of Egypt I called my Son" (Matthew 2:15; see Hosea 11:1), God called Jesus "out of Egypt," not toward Egypt or any other Eastern site.
When Jesus taught in the synagogue in his hometown, many were amazed at his teaching and wondered, "What's this wisdom that's been given him, that he even does miracles! Isn't this the carpenter? Isn't this Mary's son and the brother of James, Joseph, Judas and Simon? Aren't his sisters here with us?" (Mark 6:2,3; cf. Matthew 13:53-58). They were shocked that the Jesus they knew--this hometown boy--would teach with power and work miracles.
Jesus' biblical biography sums up his life between the ages of about 12 to 30 with one sentence in Luke: "And Jesus increased in wisdom and in years, and in divine and human favor" (2:52, NRSV). However, there is no hint that he left Palestine. As a carpenter, he would have no reason to do so. As the Son of Man, he said, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel" (Matthew 15:24). Jesus never showed any desire to explore the world in search of greater teaching; in fact, he confidently affirmed to the Samaritan woman that "salvation is from the Jews" (John 4:22). A reading of the Gospels does not reveal a gaping hole in Jesus' life. No years are "lost"; rather, some years are summarized. Given Jesus' later ministry and his interest in theology displayed as a child, we can well imagine him studying the Scriptures while learning the trade of carpentry from his father. Commenting on the supposed "lost years," biblical scholar Edgar Goodspeed assumes that it was no wonder Jesus could use the Hebrew prophets "with such power in his years, as no one has ever done, before or since."[1]
In the Gospels, the key to Jesus' public ministry is not a sojourn to the East, but his baptism. This is the time when God the Father publicly endorsed and commissioned him and when the Holy Spirit came upon him in power. Jesus' subsequent ministry and teaching was not that of a Hindu guru or Buddhist sage. He preached resurrection, not reincarnation. He instructed his disciples to relate to a personal God, not an impersonal principle. He declared and demonstrated himself uniquely to be God in the flesh, not one of many God-realized masters.[2]
Nevertheless, two passages from the New Testament are sometimes used to justify Jesus as a world traveler. The first is John 21:25: "Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written."[3] This is thought to allow for eastward adventures. However, a parallel passage adds more clarity to this verse.
Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name (John 20:30, 31).
John is overwhelmed with Jesus' miraculous power, but he has selected certain accounts in order to encourage belief in Jesus. His statement that all the books in the world could not contain a complete record of Jesus' deeds is not a general endorsement of anything that might be said about him. In fact, in John's first letter he warns of Antichrists who distort the doctrine of Christ (1 John 4:1-4). Someone might say that all the biographies the world has to offer on Mother Teresa are not sufficient to record the extent of her loving deeds, but this would in no way open the door to a biography claiming that she spent her teenage years as a glamorous fashion model in France! John is referring to those things Jesus did when he was with his disciples in Palestine. Lost years are not in question.
In her book The Jesus Mystery (1984), Janet Bock refers to John 1:31, where John the Baptist says he did not know Jesus, as evidence that Jesus had been away from Palestine for quite some time. Otherwise, John--Jesus' cousin--would have recognized him.[4] Bock fails to note the obvious fact that John was a recluse who "lived in the desert until he appeared publicly to Israel" (Luke 1:80); he may not have known Jesus at all because he had not grown up with him. Or this may mean that John would not have known Jesus was the Messiah if not for the fact that the Holy Spirit had descended on him (John1:29-34). In any case, lost years and world travels are not the issue.
Nevertheless, these silent or "lost" years have mystified and preoccupied many who believe that within these summarized years lies the entire meaning of Jesus.
ENTER NICHOLAS NOTOVITCH
In 1894 a Russian journalist named Nicholas Notovitch published a book in France called The Unknown Life of Jesus Christ, which became quite popular and controversial, going through eight editions in one year. Later in that same year, three English translations appeared, along with Italian and German translations, followed a few years later by Swedish (1896) and Spanish (1909) translations.[5] Notovitch's story was as exotic as his claims were bold. If he was right, historic, institutional Christianity was wrong.
The controversy centered on a supposedly lost Tibetan text called "The Life of Saint Issa: Best of the Sons of Men," which claims that Jesus left Palestine from ages 13 to 29 to travel east. Notovitch made this rather short text the heart of his book. He also added essays explaining how he happened to find the lost text and what he made of its significance.
In 1907, Levi Downing offered a channeled book, The Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ, which echoed many of Notovitch's claims. Several books--such as The Lost Years of Jesus by Elizabeth Clare Prophet (1984), The Jesus Mystery by Janet Bock, and Jesus Lived in India (1986) by Holger Kersten--present the claims of Notovitch, Downing, and others as serious challenges to historic Christianity. With certain variations, they all believe that Jesus was no stranger to the mystic East. He lived there, imbibed the ancient teachings, and returned to Palestine an enlightened master. But it all began with the obscure Russian journalist, Notovitch. Just what did he claim and what was his evidence?
In the preface of The Unknown Life of Jesus Christ, Notovitch reports that after the Turkish War (1877-78) he journeyed to India to study "the peoples who inhabit India and their customs, the grand and mysterious archaeology, and the colossal and majestic nature of their country."[6] After various travels he arrived at Ladakh, Tibet, from where he intended to return to Russia. But while there, he heard from a chief lama of "very ancient memoirs relating to the life of Jesus Christ,"[7] contained in certain great monasteries. With renewed vigor, Notovitch decided to hunt down this material instead of returning to Russia. While at Leh, the capital of Ladakh, he visited the Himis monastery, where the chief lama informed him that copies of the manuscripts were housed. Notovitch says that in order not to arouse suspicion, he decided to depart for India.[8]
After his departure, Notovitch says he fortuitously broke his leg, which brought him back to Himis for treatment and, ultimately, for the recovery of the "lost" years of Jesus. He claims that upon his request, the chief lama brought to him "the manuscripts relating to Jesus Christ and, assisted by my interpreter, who translated for me the Thibetan [sic] language, transferred carefully to my note book what the lama read to me."[9] He says that since he did not doubt the authenticity of the chronicle, which was "edited with great exactitude by the Brahminic, and more especially the Buddhistic historians of India and Nepaul [sic],"[10] he sought to publish a translation.
Notovitch claimed to be so sure of the document's authenticity that he essentially threw down the gauntlet to those who favored the New Testament Gospels, saying his discovery was "compiled three or four years after the death of Jesus, from the accounts of eyewitnesses and contemporaries, [and] has much more probability of being in conformity with truth than the accounts of the Gospels," which he held to be written much later.[11]
So runs a sreamlined account of the alleged uncovering of the text. But what does the text say?
THE LIFE OF SAINT ISSA (JESUS)
Notovitch published the text under the title "The Life of Saint Issa: Best of the Sons of Men," within his book The Unknown Life of Jesus Christ. It is divided into 14 chapters with verses within the chapter. It begins with a prologue lamenting "the great crime committed in the land of Israel" (1:1) of murdering "the great and just Issa, in whom was manifest the soul of the universe" (1:2). Issa (Jesus) was incarnated to lead people back to "the one and indivisible Creator whose mercy is infinite" (1:4).
The next verse speaks of "the merchants coming from Israel" who gave the account reported in the text (1:5). A discussion of Israel's bondage in Egypt follows, speaking of Prince Mossa's (Moses') role in securing the liberation of God's people from Pharaoh. Mossa leads Israel back to God, but they soon return to idolatry.[12]
We then hear of Israel's unfaithfulness being punished by God through the Roman oppression. Yet God heard his people's prayers and decided to "re-incarnate in a human form" (4:1). "The eternal Spirit" came in human form so "He might teach man to identify himself with the Divinity and attain to eternal felicity" (4:3).
God spoke through this child, and even as a youth Issa gathered a following by talking of "the only indivisible God" and "exhorting the strayed souls to repent and purify themselves from [their] sins" (4:8). Yet at age 13, just when he expected to marry, Issa left Jerusalem with a train of merchants and "journeyed toward the Sinda [India]" (4:13).
At age 14, Issa "came this side of the Sindh and settled among the Aryas, in the country beloved by God" (5:1). After his fame spread in the northern Sindh, "the devotees of the god Djaine" (5:2) sought him, but he "left the deluded worshippers" (5:3) and went to "Djagguernat, in the country of Orsis" (5:3), where Brahma priests taught him to comprehend the Vedas, to cure physical ills by prayer, to teach the sacred scriptures, to drive out evil desires from man and remake him in the likeness of God (5:4).
During six years here and in "other holy cities" (5:5), Issa lived and loved the lower Hindu classes and sided with them against the oppressing higher classes. He even "denied the divine inspiration of the Vedas and the Puranas" in favor of the universal law of worshiping God alone (5:12-13). Issa denounced all idolatry, and called down the anger of God on those who worship inanimate objects (5:15-26). God is the "cause of the mysterious life of man, into whom He has breathed part of His divine Being" (5:18).
Although the higher classes of priests and warriors took offense at Issa's rejection of their teaching and sought to kill him, he escaped to "the country of the Gautamides, where the great Buddha Sakya-Muni came to the world, among a people who worshiped the only and sublime Brahma" (6:2). In other words, Issa moved from Hinduism to Buddhism, although a Buddhist worshiping Brahma is anomalous to say the least.[13] He then mastered the Pali language and studied the sacred Sutras (Buddhist scriptures) for six years, after which he could "perfectly expound the sacred scrolls" (6:4).
He then left Nepal and the Himalayan mountains and descended to the valley of Radjipoutan. He later moved to the west and everywhere preached "the supreme perfection attainable by man" (6:5). Issa continued to condemn idolatry among "the Pagans" (6:7-16), warning that those who create idols "will be the prey of an eternal fire" (7:10). Many forsook their idols (7:1).
Issa's next stop was Persia, where he excoriated the Zoroastrians for viewing God as both good and evil and for worshiping the sun. This was less than warmly received by the "Magi," who abandoned Issa on a highway outside the city in the middle of the night, hoping he would become breakfast for wild beasts. Yet he escaped.
Issa, then age 29, returned to Israel for three years. There he preached high ethical standards of reverence for God, altruism, and nonresistance in relation to Roman oppression. He was unopposed by the Jewish religious leadership but was feared by Pilate, who worried that he would incite insurrection. Pilate gave Issa over to the Jewish judges, who found no fault in him and washed their hands in a sacred vessel saying, "We are innocent of the blood of this righteous man" (13:25).
Nevertheless, Pilate prevailed, and Issa was crucified. After a full day on the cross, Issa "lost consciousness and his soul disengaged itself from the body, to reunite with God" (14:4). "Thus ended the terrestrial existence of the reflection of the eternal Spirit under the form of a man who had saved hardened sinners and comforted the afflicted" (14:4).
Pilate then ordered that the body be given to relatives, who placed it in a tomb where many came to wail and lament. Three days later, Pilate had Issa's body put in another place, fearing a rebellion among the people (14:6). When some of Issa's followers visited the now-empty tomb, a rumor spread that "the Supreme Judge had sent his angels from heaven, to remove the mortal remains of the saint in whom part of the divine Spirit had lived on earth" (14:7).
This caused Pilate to become angry and to impose the death penalty for proselytizing in Issa's name (14:8). Nevertheless, despite persecution, Issa's disciples left Israel and preached to the heathen to "abandon their gross errors, think of the salvation of their souls and earn the perfect bliss" for the immaterial world of the great Creator (14:10). And they met with success (14:11). So ends "The Life of Saint Issa."
REALITY ACCORDING TO ISSA
The theology of the text is a curious mixture of Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, and Buddhism. The God of Issa seems to be a personal and moral being who demands worship and hates idolatry (hence Judaism), even threatening unrepentant idolaters with hell! The Christian element is present in that some of Issa's teachings are close to those found in the Gospels, particularly when he says he did not come to disown the laws of Moses but to "reestablish them in the hearts of men" (10:21; cf. Matthew 5:17-20). Yet the appearance of Issa is closer to the pantheistic Hindu idea of an avatar (periodic manifestation of God) than the Christian view of God uniquely incarnate as a man, because Issa is said to "manifest the soul of the universe." Issa seems most favorably disposed toward Buddhism which, unlike the other religions he is exposed to, he does not criticize. He leaves Israel with the express purpose of studying "the laws of the great Buddhas" (14:13). Zoroastrianism and Jainism fare far less well.
Notovitch's narrative and the Issa the text presents are drastically detached from the biblical record at many points, but we will only mention a few decisive dissimilarities.
We read of Issa learning from the Hindus how "to cure physical ills by means of prayers" (5:4), but the text gives us no record of him doing so or of any supernatural touch upon his ministry. Issa, unlike Jesus, is a stranger to the miraculous.
In the story of Issa, the Jewish religious leaders side with Issa against Pilate, begging him to not execute him. This contradicts all four Gospels, which present both the Jewish leadership and Roman rule as equally responsible for his death. The growing tension between Jesus and the Jewish religious establishment, so keenly felt in the Gospels, is absent from the account of Issa.
Although Issa is somehow a revelation of God, he is not an incarnation in the biblical sense. He is said to be a manifestation of "the soul of the universe" (1:2) and "a saint in whom part of the divine Spirit had lived on earth" (14:7). These descriptions are absolutely alien to biblical theology, which declares Jesus to be "the Word made flesh," who Himself created the universe (John 1:1-18).
Issa and the narration repeatedly speak of sin and the need to repent from sin, especially idolatry, yet Issa is silent about any atoning sacrifice being offered for sin. Rather, "the good he must do to his fellow man [is] the sure means of speedy union with the eternal Spirit" (6:6). "He who has recovered his primitive purity shall die with his transgressions forgiven" (6:6). Issa teaches that part of God dwells in each person (5:18; 9:15), and it is intimated that salvation involves identifying oneself with this indwelling part (4:3). Issa is more an ethical teacher and preacher than a Redeemer who atones for our sin through his crucifixion.
The account of Issa's crucifixion occupies only a small fraction of the text, whereas the Gospels emphasize it more than any other aspect of Jesus' life. This betrays the theology: Issa dies a martyr's death, not a Savior's death. His life is more important than his death. His death is the end, not the beginning.
What the Gospels present as the climax of Jesus' ministry and his ultimate vindication--the resurrection, "The Life of Saint Issa" flatly denies. Issa's body was secretly moved by Pilate, after which his followers mistakenly assume his body was supernaturally transported to heaven, when in reality it was rotting in an unmarked grave of Pilate's choosing.
The text provides no reason why Pilate would think that moving the body to another grave would discourage an insurrection, nor is any reason evident. But if Pilate feared a mass Christian movement and knew where Jesus' body was located, it would have only made sense to produce the corpse in order to squash all preaching of the resurrection. History knows nothing of this.
But before looking at the evidence for and against Notovitch's claims, we should note that the theology of Issa itself is at odds with much of the new spirituality. This is especially ironic considering that many often invoke Issa to support their view of Jesus as a mystical guru.
The text seems to speak of God as a personal and moral being, not the impersonal force, principle, or vibration of much of the new spirituality. Issa's God is often angry at humans for their disobedience, particuarly concerning idolatry. Hinduism, which provides much of the spiritual muscle for the new spirituality, takes it on the theological chin several times.
Although Issa speaks of humans as having at least part of the divine spirit in them, he calls people to repent of sin (sin being understood as actions and attitudes that displease a personal God). This is at odds with the human potential aspect of the new spirituality, which stresses our sinlessness and infinite potential. At one point Issa says that miracles cannot be performed by man (11:7), thus putting him at some distance from the paranormal propensity of much New Age thinking.
Further, Issa comes out against divination, saying that "he who has recourse to diviners soils the temple of his heart and shows his lack of faith in his Creator (11:10). This puts the brakes on any number of divining practices, such as Tarot card reading, casting the I Ching, using crystal divination, and psychic readings, which are accepted by many spiritual seekers.
The story of Issa seems unclear on reincarnation. It says that God was in some sense "reincarnated" in Issa, but it also speaks of the Judgment Day as if it were a final judgment. Issa does deny transmigration, saying that God "will never humiliate his child by casting his soul for chastisement into the body of a beast" (6:11). So we can say the text is at least ambiguous on the doctrine of reincarnation.
"The Life of Saint Issa: Best of the Sons of Men" is really a theological hodgepodge. It does not clearly support many core New Age doctrines, despite the fact that books like The Jesus Mystery by Janet Bock claim that Jesus' supposed travels reveal him to be more of an Eastern mystic than the church wants to believe.
Janet Bock and other writers tend to supplement the Notovitch book with various spiritual revelations received by people like Edgar Cayce and Levi Downing during trance states. What historical evidence do we have for the objective truth of Jesus as Saint Issa? We turn to this in the next section.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Edgar J. Goodspeed, Modern Apocrypha (Boston: The Beacon Press, 1956), 7.
[2] For a detailed comparison of Jesus and present-day Indian gurus see Vishal Mangalwadi, The World of the Gurus, rev. ed. (Chicago: Cornerstone Press, 1992).
[3] The story of Elizabeth Caspari's supposed contact with the "Life of Saint Issa" uses this verse as a defense in Elizabeth Clare Prophet, The Lost Years of Jesus (Livingstone, MT: Summit University Press, 1984), 317. Janet Bock, The Jesus Mystery (Los Angeles: Aura Books, 1984), 116-17.
[4] Janet Bock, The Jesus Mystery (Los Angeles: Aura Books, 1984), 116-17.
[5] See Goodspeed, 3, and for exact bibliographic information on the French and American publications, Per Beskow, Strange Tales about Jesus ( Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985), 121.
[6] Nicholas Notovitch, The Unknown Life of Jesus Christ, translated by J. H. Connelly and L. Landsberg (New York: R.F. Fenno and Company, 1890), 7. (This stated publication date is in all likelihood mistaken, since the first editions did not come out until 1894.) I have chosen to cite this edition because it appears to be less condensed in translation than the edition translated by Virchand R. Gandhi and revised by G. L. Christie (Chicago: Progressive Thinker Publishing House, 1907). This edition includes some unusual spellings that I will not correct when quoting. I will, on some occasions, refer to Prophet's Lost Years, which reprints another edition of The Unknown Life (which appears to be the edition translated by Violet Crispe [London: Hutchinson and Co., 1895]; but this is never directly stated). This includes a preface added by Notovitch in response to his critics, which is not available in the editions to which I have direct access.
[7] Notovitch, 8.
[8] His exact reasoning for this is never spelled out.
[9] Notovitch, 10.
[10] Ibid., 10-11.
[11] Ibid., 229-30.
[12] The brief story diverges from the account in Exodus at many places that need not concern us.
[13] If Buddhists worship anything, it is Buddha, not Brahma.
This article is printed by permission of the author from the book, “Revealing the New Age Jesus,” by D. Groothius.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright © 2009 Karma2Grace.org All Rights Reserved
EzWeb by TeknaLight
http://www.karma2grace.org/page.asp?pg=77
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Telugu Lost Years of Jesus
We all love secrets, especially when we are the recipients of a particularly juicy one. And the more significant the subject matter, the more precious the secret. Hidden wisdom is a scarce and treasured commodity that elevates the initiated into rarefied realms. What the masses have lost, the knowers have found. Blessed are the knowers who see through convention to reality--those who solve the mystery of "the lost years of Jesus." Many people entranced by the new spirituality embrace a Jesus unknown to traditional Christians: a world traveler.
The conventional Christian understanding of Jesus places him in Jewish sandals worn only in ancient Palestine. The Christ came to the Jewish people, as promised by the prophets, to mend the lame, feed the poor, raise the dead, proclaim the kingdom, obey the Father, die as a ransom for many, and be raised from the dead as the final demonstration of his unique mission and deity. Before his ascension, Jesus charged his disciples to make disciples of all the nations (Matthew 28:18-20; Acts 1:8), yet his own earthly ministry was limited to his homeland, Palestine.
In the biblical understanding, Jesus need not be a world traveler to be the Savior of the world. Matthew records Jesus' trip to Egypt as an infant, but the significance of this flight from Herod's sword is explained as a fulfillment of the prophecy, "Out of Egypt I called my Son" (Matthew 2:15; see Hosea 11:1), God called Jesus "out of Egypt," not toward Egypt or any other Eastern site.
When Jesus taught in the synagogue in his hometown, many were amazed at his teaching and wondered, "What's this wisdom that's been given him, that he even does miracles! Isn't this the carpenter? Isn't this Mary's son and the brother of James, Joseph, Judas and Simon? Aren't his sisters here with us?" (Mark 6:2,3; cf. Matthew 13:53-58). They were shocked that the Jesus they knew--this hometown boy--would teach with power and work miracles.
Jesus' biblical biography sums up his life between the ages of about 12 to 30 with one sentence in Luke: "And Jesus increased in wisdom and in years, and in divine and human favor" (2:52, NRSV). However, there is no hint that he left Palestine. As a carpenter, he would have no reason to do so. As the Son of Man, he said, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel" (Matthew 15:24). Jesus never showed any desire to explore the world in search of greater teaching; in fact, he confidently affirmed to the Samaritan woman that "salvation is from the Jews" (John 4:22). A reading of the Gospels does not reveal a gaping hole in Jesus' life. No years are "lost"; rather, some years are summarized. Given Jesus' later ministry and his interest in theology displayed as a child, we can well imagine him studying the Scriptures while learning the trade of carpentry from his father. Commenting on the supposed "lost years," biblical scholar Edgar Goodspeed assumes that it was no wonder Jesus could use the Hebrew prophets "with such power in his years, as no one has ever done, before or since."[1]
In the Gospels, the key to Jesus' public ministry is not a sojourn to the East, but his baptism. This is the time when God the Father publicly endorsed and commissioned him and when the Holy Spirit came upon him in power. Jesus' subsequent ministry and teaching was not that of a Hindu guru or Buddhist sage. He preached resurrection, not reincarnation. He instructed his disciples to relate to a personal God, not an impersonal principle. He declared and demonstrated himself uniquely to be God in the flesh, not one of many God-realized masters.[2]
Nevertheless, two passages from the New Testament are sometimes used to justify Jesus as a world traveler. The first is John 21:25: "Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written."[3] This is thought to allow for eastward adventures. However, a parallel passage adds more clarity to this verse.
Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name (John 20:30, 31).
John is overwhelmed with Jesus' miraculous power, but he has selected certain accounts in order to encourage belief in Jesus. His statement that all the books in the world could not contain a complete record of Jesus' deeds is not a general endorsement of anything that might be said about him. In fact, in John's first letter he warns of Antichrists who distort the doctrine of Christ (1 John 4:1-4). Someone might say that all the biographies the world has to offer on Mother Teresa are not sufficient to record the extent of her loving deeds, but this would in no way open the door to a biography claiming that she spent her teenage years as a glamorous fashion model in France! John is referring to those things Jesus did when he was with his disciples in Palestine. Lost years are not in question.
In her book The Jesus Mystery (1984), Janet Bock refers to John 1:31, where John the Baptist says he did not know Jesus, as evidence that Jesus had been away from Palestine for quite some time. Otherwise, John--Jesus' cousin--would have recognized him.[4] Bock fails to note the obvious fact that John was a recluse who "lived in the desert until he appeared publicly to Israel" (Luke 1:80); he may not have known Jesus at all because he had not grown up with him. Or this may mean that John would not have known Jesus was the Messiah if not for the fact that the Holy Spirit had descended on him (John1:29-34). In any case, lost years and world travels are not the issue.
Nevertheless, these silent or "lost" years have mystified and preoccupied many who believe that within these summarized years lies the entire meaning of Jesus.
ENTER NICHOLAS NOTOVITCH
In 1894 a Russian journalist named Nicholas Notovitch published a book in France called The Unknown Life of Jesus Christ, which became quite popular and controversial, going through eight editions in one year. Later in that same year, three English translations appeared, along with Italian and German translations, followed a few years later by Swedish (1896) and Spanish (1909) translations.[5] Notovitch's story was as exotic as his claims were bold. If he was right, historic, institutional Christianity was wrong.
The controversy centered on a supposedly lost Tibetan text called "The Life of Saint Issa: Best of the Sons of Men," which claims that Jesus left Palestine from ages 13 to 29 to travel east. Notovitch made this rather short text the heart of his book. He also added essays explaining how he happened to find the lost text and what he made of its significance.
In 1907, Levi Downing offered a channeled book, The Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ, which echoed many of Notovitch's claims. Several books--such as The Lost Years of Jesus by Elizabeth Clare Prophet (1984), The Jesus Mystery by Janet Bock, and Jesus Lived in India (1986) by Holger Kersten--present the claims of Notovitch, Downing, and others as serious challenges to historic Christianity. With certain variations, they all believe that Jesus was no stranger to the mystic East. He lived there, imbibed the ancient teachings, and returned to Palestine an enlightened master. But it all began with the obscure Russian journalist, Notovitch. Just what did he claim and what was his evidence?
In the preface of The Unknown Life of Jesus Christ, Notovitch reports that after the Turkish War (1877-78) he journeyed to India to study "the peoples who inhabit India and their customs, the grand and mysterious archaeology, and the colossal and majestic nature of their country."[6] After various travels he arrived at Ladakh, Tibet, from where he intended to return to Russia. But while there, he heard from a chief lama of "very ancient memoirs relating to the life of Jesus Christ,"[7] contained in certain great monasteries. With renewed vigor, Notovitch decided to hunt down this material instead of returning to Russia. While at Leh, the capital of Ladakh, he visited the Himis monastery, where the chief lama informed him that copies of the manuscripts were housed. Notovitch says that in order not to arouse suspicion, he decided to depart for India.[8]
After his departure, Notovitch says he fortuitously broke his leg, which brought him back to Himis for treatment and, ultimately, for the recovery of the "lost" years of Jesus. He claims that upon his request, the chief lama brought to him "the manuscripts relating to Jesus Christ and, assisted by my interpreter, who translated for me the Thibetan [sic] language, transferred carefully to my note book what the lama read to me."[9] He says that since he did not doubt the authenticity of the chronicle, which was "edited with great exactitude by the Brahminic, and more especially the Buddhistic historians of India and Nepaul [sic],"[10] he sought to publish a translation.
Notovitch claimed to be so sure of the document's authenticity that he essentially threw down the gauntlet to those who favored the New Testament Gospels, saying his discovery was "compiled three or four years after the death of Jesus, from the accounts of eyewitnesses and contemporaries, [and] has much more probability of being in conformity with truth than the accounts of the Gospels," which he held to be written much later.[11]
So runs a sreamlined account of the alleged uncovering of the text. But what does the text say?
THE LIFE OF SAINT ISSA (JESUS)
Notovitch published the text under the title "The Life of Saint Issa: Best of the Sons of Men," within his book The Unknown Life of Jesus Christ. It is divided into 14 chapters with verses within the chapter. It begins with a prologue lamenting "the great crime committed in the land of Israel" (1:1) of murdering "the great and just Issa, in whom was manifest the soul of the universe" (1:2). Issa (Jesus) was incarnated to lead people back to "the one and indivisible Creator whose mercy is infinite" (1:4).
The next verse speaks of "the merchants coming from Israel" who gave the account reported in the text (1:5). A discussion of Israel's bondage in Egypt follows, speaking of Prince Mossa's (Moses') role in securing the liberation of God's people from Pharaoh. Mossa leads Israel back to God, but they soon return to idolatry.[12]
We then hear of Israel's unfaithfulness being punished by God through the Roman oppression. Yet God heard his people's prayers and decided to "re-incarnate in a human form" (4:1). "The eternal Spirit" came in human form so "He might teach man to identify himself with the Divinity and attain to eternal felicity" (4:3).
God spoke through this child, and even as a youth Issa gathered a following by talking of "the only indivisible God" and "exhorting the strayed souls to repent and purify themselves from [their] sins" (4:8). Yet at age 13, just when he expected to marry, Issa left Jerusalem with a train of merchants and "journeyed toward the Sinda [India]" (4:13).
At age 14, Issa "came this side of the Sindh and settled among the Aryas, in the country beloved by God" (5:1). After his fame spread in the northern Sindh, "the devotees of the god Djaine" (5:2) sought him, but he "left the deluded worshippers" (5:3) and went to "Djagguernat, in the country of Orsis" (5:3), where Brahma priests taught him to comprehend the Vedas, to cure physical ills by prayer, to teach the sacred scriptures, to drive out evil desires from man and remake him in the likeness of God (5:4).
During six years here and in "other holy cities" (5:5), Issa lived and loved the lower Hindu classes and sided with them against the oppressing higher classes. He even "denied the divine inspiration of the Vedas and the Puranas" in favor of the universal law of worshiping God alone (5:12-13). Issa denounced all idolatry, and called down the anger of God on those who worship inanimate objects (5:15-26). God is the "cause of the mysterious life of man, into whom He has breathed part of His divine Being" (5:18).
Although the higher classes of priests and warriors took offense at Issa's rejection of their teaching and sought to kill him, he escaped to "the country of the Gautamides, where the great Buddha Sakya-Muni came to the world, among a people who worshiped the only and sublime Brahma" (6:2). In other words, Issa moved from Hinduism to Buddhism, although a Buddhist worshiping Brahma is anomalous to say the least.[13] He then mastered the Pali language and studied the sacred Sutras (Buddhist scriptures) for six years, after which he could "perfectly expound the sacred scrolls" (6:4).
He then left Nepal and the Himalayan mountains and descended to the valley of Radjipoutan. He later moved to the west and everywhere preached "the supreme perfection attainable by man" (6:5). Issa continued to condemn idolatry among "the Pagans" (6:7-16), warning that those who create idols "will be the prey of an eternal fire" (7:10). Many forsook their idols (7:1).
Issa's next stop was Persia, where he excoriated the Zoroastrians for viewing God as both good and evil and for worshiping the sun. This was less than warmly received by the "Magi," who abandoned Issa on a highway outside the city in the middle of the night, hoping he would become breakfast for wild beasts. Yet he escaped.
Issa, then age 29, returned to Israel for three years. There he preached high ethical standards of reverence for God, altruism, and nonresistance in relation to Roman oppression. He was unopposed by the Jewish religious leadership but was feared by Pilate, who worried that he would incite insurrection. Pilate gave Issa over to the Jewish judges, who found no fault in him and washed their hands in a sacred vessel saying, "We are innocent of the blood of this righteous man" (13:25).
Nevertheless, Pilate prevailed, and Issa was crucified. After a full day on the cross, Issa "lost consciousness and his soul disengaged itself from the body, to reunite with God" (14:4). "Thus ended the terrestrial existence of the reflection of the eternal Spirit under the form of a man who had saved hardened sinners and comforted the afflicted" (14:4).
Pilate then ordered that the body be given to relatives, who placed it in a tomb where many came to wail and lament. Three days later, Pilate had Issa's body put in another place, fearing a rebellion among the people (14:6). When some of Issa's followers visited the now-empty tomb, a rumor spread that "the Supreme Judge had sent his angels from heaven, to remove the mortal remains of the saint in whom part of the divine Spirit had lived on earth" (14:7).
This caused Pilate to become angry and to impose the death penalty for proselytizing in Issa's name (14:8). Nevertheless, despite persecution, Issa's disciples left Israel and preached to the heathen to "abandon their gross errors, think of the salvation of their souls and earn the perfect bliss" for the immaterial world of the great Creator (14:10). And they met with success (14:11). So ends "The Life of Saint Issa."
REALITY ACCORDING TO ISSA
The theology of the text is a curious mixture of Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, and Buddhism. The God of Issa seems to be a personal and moral being who demands worship and hates idolatry (hence Judaism), even threatening unrepentant idolaters with hell! The Christian element is present in that some of Issa's teachings are close to those found in the Gospels, particularly when he says he did not come to disown the laws of Moses but to "reestablish them in the hearts of men" (10:21; cf. Matthew 5:17-20). Yet the appearance of Issa is closer to the pantheistic Hindu idea of an avatar (periodic manifestation of God) than the Christian view of God uniquely incarnate as a man, because Issa is said to "manifest the soul of the universe." Issa seems most favorably disposed toward Buddhism which, unlike the other religions he is exposed to, he does not criticize. He leaves Israel with the express purpose of studying "the laws of the great Buddhas" (14:13). Zoroastrianism and Jainism fare far less well.
Notovitch's narrative and the Issa the text presents are drastically detached from the biblical record at many points, but we will only mention a few decisive dissimilarities.
We read of Issa learning from the Hindus how "to cure physical ills by means of prayers" (5:4), but the text gives us no record of him doing so or of any supernatural touch upon his ministry. Issa, unlike Jesus, is a stranger to the miraculous.
In the story of Issa, the Jewish religious leaders side with Issa against Pilate, begging him to not execute him. This contradicts all four Gospels, which present both the Jewish leadership and Roman rule as equally responsible for his death. The growing tension between Jesus and the Jewish religious establishment, so keenly felt in the Gospels, is absent from the account of Issa.
Although Issa is somehow a revelation of God, he is not an incarnation in the biblical sense. He is said to be a manifestation of "the soul of the universe" (1:2) and "a saint in whom part of the divine Spirit had lived on earth" (14:7). These descriptions are absolutely alien to biblical theology, which declares Jesus to be "the Word made flesh," who Himself created the universe (John 1:1-18).
Issa and the narration repeatedly speak of sin and the need to repent from sin, especially idolatry, yet Issa is silent about any atoning sacrifice being offered for sin. Rather, "the good he must do to his fellow man [is] the sure means of speedy union with the eternal Spirit" (6:6). "He who has recovered his primitive purity shall die with his transgressions forgiven" (6:6). Issa teaches that part of God dwells in each person (5:18; 9:15), and it is intimated that salvation involves identifying oneself with this indwelling part (4:3). Issa is more an ethical teacher and preacher than a Redeemer who atones for our sin through his crucifixion.
The account of Issa's crucifixion occupies only a small fraction of the text, whereas the Gospels emphasize it more than any other aspect of Jesus' life. This betrays the theology: Issa dies a martyr's death, not a Savior's death. His life is more important than his death. His death is the end, not the beginning.
What the Gospels present as the climax of Jesus' ministry and his ultimate vindication--the resurrection, "The Life of Saint Issa" flatly denies. Issa's body was secretly moved by Pilate, after which his followers mistakenly assume his body was supernaturally transported to heaven, when in reality it was rotting in an unmarked grave of Pilate's choosing.
The text provides no reason why Pilate would think that moving the body to another grave would discourage an insurrection, nor is any reason evident. But if Pilate feared a mass Christian movement and knew where Jesus' body was located, it would have only made sense to produce the corpse in order to squash all preaching of the resurrection. History knows nothing of this.
But before looking at the evidence for and against Notovitch's claims, we should note that the theology of Issa itself is at odds with much of the new spirituality. This is especially ironic considering that many often invoke Issa to support their view of Jesus as a mystical guru.
The text seems to speak of God as a personal and moral being, not the impersonal force, principle, or vibration of much of the new spirituality. Issa's God is often angry at humans for their disobedience, particuarly concerning idolatry. Hinduism, which provides much of the spiritual muscle for the new spirituality, takes it on the theological chin several times.
Although Issa speaks of humans as having at least part of the divine spirit in them, he calls people to repent of sin (sin being understood as actions and attitudes that displease a personal God). This is at odds with the human potential aspect of the new spirituality, which stresses our sinlessness and infinite potential. At one point Issa says that miracles cannot be performed by man (11:7), thus putting him at some distance from the paranormal propensity of much New Age thinking.
Further, Issa comes out against divination, saying that "he who has recourse to diviners soils the temple of his heart and shows his lack of faith in his Creator (11:10). This puts the brakes on any number of divining practices, such as Tarot card reading, casting the I Ching, using crystal divination, and psychic readings, which are accepted by many spiritual seekers.
The story of Issa seems unclear on reincarnation. It says that God was in some sense "reincarnated" in Issa, but it also speaks of the Judgment Day as if it were a final judgment. Issa does deny transmigration, saying that God "will never humiliate his child by casting his soul for chastisement into the body of a beast" (6:11). So we can say the text is at least ambiguous on the doctrine of reincarnation.
"The Life of Saint Issa: Best of the Sons of Men" is really a theological hodgepodge. It does not clearly support many core New Age doctrines, despite the fact that books like The Jesus Mystery by Janet Bock claim that Jesus' supposed travels reveal him to be more of an Eastern mystic than the church wants to believe.
Janet Bock and other writers tend to supplement the Notovitch book with various spiritual revelations received by people like Edgar Cayce and Levi Downing during trance states. What historical evidence do we have for the objective truth of Jesus as Saint Issa? We turn to this in the next section.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Edgar J. Goodspeed, Modern Apocrypha (Boston: The Beacon Press, 1956), 7.
[2] For a detailed comparison of Jesus and present-day Indian gurus see Vishal Mangalwadi, The World of the Gurus, rev. ed. (Chicago: Cornerstone Press, 1992).
[3] The story of Elizabeth Caspari's supposed contact with the "Life of Saint Issa" uses this verse as a defense in Elizabeth Clare Prophet, The Lost Years of Jesus (Livingstone, MT: Summit University Press, 1984), 317. Janet Bock, The Jesus Mystery (Los Angeles: Aura Books, 1984), 116-17.
[4] Janet Bock, The Jesus Mystery (Los Angeles: Aura Books, 1984), 116-17.
[5] See Goodspeed, 3, and for exact bibliographic information on the French and American publications, Per Beskow, Strange Tales about Jesus ( Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985), 121.
[6] Nicholas Notovitch, The Unknown Life of Jesus Christ, translated by J. H. Connelly and L. Landsberg (New York: R.F. Fenno and Company, 1890), 7. (This stated publication date is in all likelihood mistaken, since the first editions did not come out until 1894.) I have chosen to cite this edition because it appears to be less condensed in translation than the edition translated by Virchand R. Gandhi and revised by G. L. Christie (Chicago: Progressive Thinker Publishing House, 1907). This edition includes some unusual spellings that I will not correct when quoting. I will, on some occasions, refer to Prophet's Lost Years, which reprints another edition of The Unknown Life (which appears to be the edition translated by Violet Crispe [London: Hutchinson and Co., 1895]; but this is never directly stated). This includes a preface added by Notovitch in response to his critics, which is not available in the editions to which I have direct access.
[7] Notovitch, 8.
[8] His exact reasoning for this is never spelled out.
[9] Notovitch, 10.
[10] Ibid., 10-11.
[11] Ibid., 229-30.
[12] The brief story diverges from the account in Exodus at many places that need not concern us.
[13] If Buddhists worship anything, it is Buddha, not Brahma.
This article is printed by permission of the author from the book, “Revealing the New Age Jesus,” by D. Groothius.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright © 2009 Karma2Grace.org All Rights Reserved
EzWeb by TeknaLight
http://www.karma2grace.org/page.asp?pg=77
Some articles on Notovitch, The Unknown Life of Christ
Some articles on Notovitch, The Unknown Life of Christ.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Nineteenth Century, 36 (July-December 1894) pp. 515-522
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE ALLEGED SOJOURN OF CHRIST IN INDIA 1
Aeneas Sylvius, afterwards Pope Pius the Second, 1458-64, when on a visit to England, was anxious to see with his own eyes the barnacle geese that were reported to grow on trees, and, being supposed to be vegetable rather than animal, were allowed to be eaten during Lent. He went as far as Scotland to see them, but when arrived there he was told that he must go further, to the Orchades, if he wished to see these miraculous geese. He seemed rather provoked at this, and, complaining that miracles would always flee further and further, he gave up his goose chase (didicimus miracula semper remotius fugere).
Since his time, the number of countries in which miracles and mysteries could find a safe hiding-place has been much reduced. If there were a single barnacle goose left in the Orchades, i.e. the Orkney Islands, tourists would by this time have given a good account of it. There are few countries left now beyond the reach of steamers or railways, and if there is a spot never trodden by a European foot, that is the very spot which is sure to be fixed upon by some adventurous members of the Alpine Club for their next expedition. Even Central Asia and Central Africa are no longer safe, and, hence, no doubt, the great charm which attaches to a country like Tibet, now almost the only country some parts of which are still closed against European explorers. It was in Tibet, therefore, that Madame Blavatsky met her Mahâtmas, who initiated her in the mysteries of Esoteric Buddhism. Mr. Sinnet claims to have followed in her footsteps, but has never described his or her route. Of course, if Madame Blavatsky and Mr. Sinnet had only told us by what passes they entered Tibet from India, at what stations they halted, and in what language they communicated with the Mahâtmas, it would not be courteous to ask any further questions. That there are Mahâtmas in India and Tibet no one would venture to deny. The only doubt is whether these real Mahâtmas know, or profess to know, anything beyond what they can, and what we can, learn from their sacred literature. If so, they have only to give the authorities to which they appeal for their esoteric knowledge, and we shall know at |516 once whether they are right or wrong. Their Sacred Canon is accessible to us as it is to them, and we could, therefore, very easily come to an understanding with them as to what they mean by Esoteric Buddhism. Their Sacred Canon exists in Sanskrit, in Chinese, and in Tibetan, and no Sacred Canon is so large and has at the same time been so minutely catalogued as that of the Buddhists in India, China, or Tibet.
But though certain portions of Tibet, and particularly the capital (Lassa), are still inaccessible, at least to English travellers from India, other portions of it, and the countries between it and India, are becoming more and more frequented by adventurous tourists. It would therefore hardly be safe to appeal any longer to unknown Mahâtmas, or to the monks of Tibetan monasteries, for wild statements about Buddhism, esoteric or otherwise, for a letter addressed to these monasteries, or to English officials in the neighbourhood, would at once bring every information that could be desired. "Where detection was so easy, it is almost impossible to believe that a Russian traveller, M. Notovitch, who has lately published a 'Life of Christ' dictated to him by Buddhist priests in the Himis Monastery, near Leh, in Ladakh, should, as his critics maintain, have invented not only the whole of this Vie inconnue de Jésus-Christ, but the whole of his journey to Ladakh. It is no doubt unfortunate that M. Notovitch lost the photographs which he took on the way, but such a thing may happen, and if an author declares that he has travelled from Kashmir to Ladakh one can hardly summon courage to doubt his word. It is certainly strange that letters should have been received not only from missionaries, but lately from English officers also passing through Leh, who, after making careful inquiries on the spot, declare that no Russian gentleman of the name of Notovitch ever passed through Leh, and that no traveller with a broken leg was ever nursed in the monastery of Himis. But M. Notovitch may have travelled in disguise, and he will no doubt be able to prove through his publisher, M. Paul Ollendorf, how both the Moravian missionaries and the English officers were misinformed by the Buddhist priests of the monastery of Leh. The monastery of Himis has often been visited, and there is a very full description of it in the works of the brothers Schlagintweit on Tibet.
But, taking it for granted that M. Notovitch is a gentleman and not a liar, we cannot help thinking that the Buddhist monks of Ladakh and Tibet must be wags, who enjoy mystifying inquisitive travellers, and that M. Notovitch fell far too easy a victim to their jokes. Possibly, the same excuse may apply to Madame Blavatsky, who was fully convinced that her friends, the Mahâtmas of Tibet, sent her letters to Calcutta, not by post, but through the air, letters which she showed to her friends, and which were written, not on Mahâtmic paper and with Mahâtmic ink, but on English paper and |517 with English ink. Be that as it may, M. Notovitch is not the first traveller in the East to whom Brâhmans or Buddhists have supplied, for a consideration, the information and even the manuscripts which they were in search of. Wilford's case ought to have served as a warning, but we know it did not serve as a warning to M. Jacolliot when he published his Bible dans l'Inde from Sanskrit originals, supplied to him by learned Pandits at Chandranagor. Madame Blavatsky, if I remember rightly, never even pretended to have received Tibetan manuscripts, or, if she had, neither she nor Mr. Sinnet have ever seen fit to publish either the text or an English translation of these treasures.
But M. Notovitch, though he did not bring the manuscripts home, at all events saw them, and not pretending to a knowledge of Tibetan, had the Tibetan text translated by an interpreter, and has published seventy pages of it in French in his Vie inconnue de Jésus-Christ. He was evidently prepared for the discovery of a Life of Christ among the Buddhists. Similarities between Christianity and Buddhism have frequently been pointed out of late, and the idea that Christ was influenced by Buddhist doctrines has more than once been put forward by popular writers. The difficulty has hitherto been to discover any real historical channel through which Buddhism could have reached Palestine at the time of Christ. M. Notovitch thinks that the manuscript which he found at Himis explains the matter in the simplest way. There is no doubt, as he says, a gap in the life of Christ, say from his fifteenth to his twenty-ninth year. During that very time the new Life found in Tibet asserts that Christ was in India, that he studied Sanskrit and Pâli, that he read the Vedas and the Buddhist Canon, and then returned through Persia to Palestine to preach the Gospel. If we understand M. Notovitch rightly, this Life of Christ was taken down from the mouths of some Jewish merchants who came to India immediately after the Crucifixion (p. 237). It was written down in Pâli, the sacred language of Southern Buddhism; the scrolls were afterwards brought from India to Nepaul and Makhada (quaere Magadha) about 200 a.d. (p. 236), and from Nepaul to Tibet, and are at present carefully preserved at Lassa. Tibetan translations of the Pâli text are found, he says, in various Buddhist monasteries, and, among the rest, at Himis. It is these Tibetan manuscripts which were translated at Himis for M. Notovitch while he was laid up in the monastery with a broken leg, and it is from these manuscripts that he has taken his new Life of Jesus Christ and published it in French, with an account of his travels. This volume, which has already passed through several editions in France, is soon to be translated into English.
There is a certain plausibility about all this. The language of Magadha, and of Southern Buddhism in general, was certainly Pâli, and Buddhism reached Tibet through Nepaul. But M. Notovitch ought to |518 have been somewhat startled and a little more sceptical when he was told that the Jewish merchants who arrived in India immediately after the Crucifixion knew not only what had happened to Christ in Palestine, but also what had happened to Jesus, or Issa, while he spent fifteen years of his life among the Brâhmans and Buddhists in India, learning Sanskrit and Pâli, and studying the Vedas and the Tripitaka. With all their cleverness the Buddhist monks would have found it hard to answer the question, how these Jewish merchants met the very people who had known Issa as a casual student of Sanskrit and Pâli in India ----for India is a large term----and still more, how those who had known Issa as a simple student in India, saw at once that he was the same person who had been put to death under Pontius Pilate. Even his name was not quite the same. His name in India is said to have been Issa, very like the Arabic name Isâ'l Masîh, Jesus, the Messiah, while, strange to say, the name of Pontius Pilate seems to have remained unchanged in its passage from Hebrew to Pâli, and from Pâli to Tibetan. We must remember that part of Tibet was converted to Mohammedanism. So much for the difficulty as to the first composition of the Life of Issa in Pâli, the joint work of Jewish merchants and the personal friends of Christ in India, whether in Sind or at Benares. Still greater, however, is the difficulty of the Tibetan translation of that Life having been preserved for so many centuries without ever being mentioned. If M. Notovitch had been better acquainted with the Buddhist literature of Tibet and China, he would never have allowed his Buddhist hosts to tell him that this Life of Jesus was -well known in Tibetan literature, though read by the learned only. We possess excellent catalogues of manuscripts and books of the Buddhists in Tibet and in China. A complete catalogue of the Tripitaka or the Buddhist Canon in Chinese has been translated into English by a pupil of mine, the Rev. Bunyiu Nanjio, M.A., and published by the Clarendon Press in 1883. It contains no less than 1,662 entries. The Tibetan Catalogue is likewise a most wonderful performance, and has been published in the Asiatic Researches, vol. xx., by Csoma Körösi, the famous Hungarian traveller, who spent years in the monasteries of Tibet and became an excellent Tibetan scholar. It has lately been republished by M. Féer in the Annales du Musée Guimet. This Catalogue is not confined to what we should call sacred or canonical books, it contains everything that was considered old and classical in Tibetan literature. There are two collections, the Kandjur and the Tandjur. The Kandjur consists of 108 large volumes, arranged in seven divisions:
1. Dulva, discipline (Vinaya).
2. Sherch'hin, wisdom (Pragnâpâramitâ).
3. P'hal-ch'hen, the garland of Buddhas (Buddha-avatansaka).
4. Kon-tségs, mountain of treasures (Ratnakûta).
5. Mdo, or Sûtras, aphorisms (Sûtrânta). |519
6. Myang-Hdas, or final emancipation (Nirvâna).
7. Gryut, Tantra or mysticism (Tantra).
'The Tandjur consists of 225 volumes, and while the Kandjur is supposed to contain the Word of Buddha, the Tandjur contains many books on grammar, philosophy, &c, which, though recognised as part of the Canon, are in no sense sacred.
In the Tandjur, therefore, if not in the Kandjur, the story of Issa ought to have its place, and if M. Notovitch had asked his Tibetan friends to give him at least a reference to that part of the Catalogue where this story might be found, he would at once have discovered that they were trying to dupe him. Two things in their account are impossible, or next to impossible. The first, that the Jews from Palestine who came to India in about 35 a.d. should have met the very people who had known Issa when he was a student at Benares; the second, that this Sutra of Issa, composed in the first century of our era, should not have found a place either in the Kandjur or in the Tandjur.
It might, of course, be said, Why should the Buddhist monks of Himis have indulged in this mystification?----but we know as a fact that Pandits in India, when hard pressed, have allowed themselves the same liberty with such men as Wilford and Jacolliot; why should not the Buddhist monks of Himis have done the same for M. Notovitch, who was determined to find a Life of Jesus Christ in Tibet? If this explanation, the only one I can think of, be rejected, nothing would remain but to accuse M. Notovitch, not simply of a mauvaise plaisanterie, but of a disgraceful fraud; and that seems a strong measure to adopt towards a gentleman who represents himself as on friendly terms with Cardinal Rotelli, M. Jules Simon, and E. Renan.
And here I must say that if there is anything that might cause misgivings in our mind as to M. Notovitch's trustworthiness, it is the way in which he speaks of his friends. When a Cardinal at Rome dissuades him from publishing his book, and also kindly offers to assist him, he hints that this was simply a bribe, and that the Cardinal wished to suppress the book. Why should he? If the story of Issa were historically true, it would remove many difficulties. It would show once for all that Jesus was a real and historical character. The teaching ascribed to him in Tibet is much the same as what is found in the Gospels, and if there are some differences, if more particularly the miraculous element is almost entirely absent, a Cardinal of the Roman Catholic Church would always have the tradition of the Church to rest on, and would probably have been most grateful for the solid historical framework supplied by the Tibetan Life.
M. Notovitch is equally uncharitable in imputing motives to the late M. Renan, who seems to have received him most kindly and to have offered to submit his discovery to the Academy. M. Notovitch |520 says that he never called on Renan again, but actually waited for his death, because he was sure that M. Renan would have secured the best part of the credit for himself, leaving to M. Notovitch nothing but the good luck of having discovered the Tibetan manuscript at Himis. Whatever else Renan was, he certainly was far from jealous, and he would have acted towards M. Notovitch in the same spirit with which he welcomed the discoveries which Hamdy Bey lately made in Syria on the very ground which had been explored before by Renan himself. Many travellers who discover manuscripts, or inscriptions, or antiquities, are too apt to forget how much they owe to good luck and to the spades of their labourers, and that, though a man who disinters a buried city may be congratulated on his devotion and courage and perseverance, he does not thereby become a scholar or antiquary. The name of the discoverer of the Rosetta stone is almost forgotten, the name of the decipherer will be remembered for ever.
The worst treatment, however, is meted out to the missionaries in Tibet. It seems that they have written to say that M. Notovitch had never broken his leg or been nursed in the monastery of Himis. This is a point that can easily be cleared up, for there are at the present moment a number of English officers at Leh, and there is the doctor who either did or did not set the traveller's leg. M. Notovitch hints that the Moravian missionaries at Leh are distrusted by the people, and that the monks would never have shown them the manuscript containing the Life of Issa. Again I say, why not? If Issa was Jesus Christ, either the Buddhist monks and the Moravian missionaries would have seen that they both believed in the same teacher, or they might have thought that this new Life of Issa was even less exposed to objections than the Gospel story. But the worst comes at the end. 'How can I tell,' he writes, 'that these missionaries have not themselves taken away the documents of which I saw the copies at the Himis monastery?' But how could they, if the monks never showed them these manuscripts? M. Notovitch goes even further. 'This is simply a supposition of my own,' he writes, 'but, if it is true, only the copies have been made to disappear, and the originals have remained at Lassa. ... I propose to start at the end of the present year for Tibet, in order to find the original documents having reference to the life of Jesus Christ. I hope to succeed in this undertaking in spite of the wishes of the missionaries, for whom, however, I have never ceased to profess the profoundest respect.' Any one who can hint that these missionaries may have stolen and suppressed the only historical Life of Christ which is known to exist, and nevertheless express the profoundest respect for them, must not be surprised if the missionaries and their friends retaliate in the same spirit. We still prefer to suppose that M. Notovitch, like Lieutenant Wilford, like M. Jacolliot, like Madame Blavatsky and Mr. Sinnet, was duped. |521 It is pleasanter to believe that Buddhist monks can at times be wags, than that M. Notovitch is a rogue.
All this, no doubt, is very sad. How long have we wished for a real historical life of Christ without the legendary halo, written, not by one of his disciples, but by an independent eye-witness who had seen and heard Christ during the three years of his active life, and who had witnessed the Crucifixion and whatever happened afterwards? And now, when we seemed to have found such a Life, written by an eye-witness of his death, and free as yet from any miraculous accretions, it turns out to be an invention of a Buddhist monk at Himis, or, as others would have it, a fraud committed by an enterprising traveller and a bold French publisher. We must not lose patience. In these days of unexpected discoveries in Egypt and elsewhere, everything is possible. There is now at Vienna a fragment of the Gospel-story more ancient than the text of St. Mark. Other things may follow. Only let us hope that if such a Life were ever to be discovered, the attitude of Christian theologians would not be like that which M. Notovitch suspects on the part of an Italian Cardinal or of the Moravian missionaries at Himis, but that the historical Christ, though different from the Christ of the Gospels, would be welcomed by all who can believe in his teaching, even without the help of miracles.
F. Max Müller.
P.S.----It is curious that at the very time I was writing this paper I received a letter from an English lady dated Leh, Ladakh, June 29. She writes:
We left Leh two days ago, having enjoyed our stay there so much! There had been only one English lady here for over three years. Two German ladies live there, missionaries, a Mr. and Mrs. Weber----a girl, and another English missionary. They have only twenty Christians, though it has been a mission-station for seven years. We saw a polo match which was played down the principal street. Yesterday we were at the great Himis monastery, the largest Buddhist monastery up here----800 Lamas. Did you hear of a Russian who could not gain admittance to the monastery in any way, but at last broke his leg outside, and was taken in? His object was to copy a Buddhist Life of Christ which is there. He says he got it, and has published it since in French. There is not a single word of truth in the whole story! There has been no Russian there. No one has been taken into the Seminary for the past fifty years with a broken leg! There is no Life of Christ there at all! It is dawning on me that people who in England profess to have been living in Buddhist monasteries in Tibet and to have learnt there the mysteries of Esoteric Buddhism are frauds. The monasteries one and all are the most filthy places. The Lamas are the dirtiest of a very dirty race. They are fearfully ignorant, and idolaters pur et simple; no----neither pure nor simple. I have asked many travellers whom I have met, and they all tell the same story. They acknowledge that perhaps at the Lama University at Lassa it may be better, but no Englishman is allowed there. Captain Bower (the discoverer of the famous Bower MS.) did his very best to get there, but failed. . . . We are roughing it |522 now very much. I have not tasted bread for five weeks, and shall not for two months more. We have 'chappaties' instead. We rarely get any butter. We carry a little tinned butter, but it is too precious to eat much of. It was a great luxury to get some linen washed in Leh, though they did starch the sheets. "We are just starting on our 500 miles march to Simla. We hear that one pass is not open yet, about which we are very anxious. We have one pass of 18,000 feet to cross, and we shall be 13,000 feet high for over a fortnight; but I hope that by the time you get this we shall be down in beautiful Kulu, only one month from Simla!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Nineteenth Century, 39 (January-June 1896) pp. 667-677
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE CHIEF LAMA OF HIMIS ON THE ALLEGED 'UNKNOWN LIFE OF CHRIST'
It is difficult for any one resident in India to estimate accurately the importance of new departures in European literature, and to gauge the degree of acceptance accorded to a fresh literary discovery such as that which M. Notovitch claims to have made. A revelation of so surprising a nature could not, however, have failed to excite keen interest, not only among theologians and the religious public generally, but also among all who wish to acquire additional information respecting ancient religious systems and civilisations.
Under these circumstances it was not surprising to find in the October (1894) number of this Review an article from the able pen of Professor Max Müller dealing with the Russian traveller's marvellous 'find.'
I confess that, not having at the time had the pleasure of reading the book which forms the subject of this article, it seemed to me that the learned Oxford Professor was disposed to treat the discoverer somewhat harshly, in holding up the Unknown Life of Christ as a literary forgery, on evidence which did not then appear conclusive.
A careful perusal of the book made a less favourable impression of the genuineness of the discovery therein described; but my faith in M. Notovitch was somewhat revived by the bold reply which that gentleman made to his critics, to the effect that he is 'neither a "hoaxer" nor a "forger," ' and that he is about to undertake a fresh journey to Tibet to prove the truth of his story.
In the light of subsequent investigations, I am bound to say that the chief interest which attaches, in my mind, to M. Notovitch's daring defence of his book is the fact that that defence appeared immediately before the publication of an English translation of his work.
I was resident in Madras during the whole of last year, and did not expect to have an opportunity of investigating the facts respecting the Unknown Life of Christ at so early a date. Removing to the North-West Provinces in the early part of the present year, I |668 found that it would be practicable during the three months of the University vacation to travel through Kashmir to Ladakh, following the route taken by M. Notovitch, and to spend sufficient time at the monastery at Himis to learn the truth on this important question. I may here mention, en passant, that I did not find it necessary to break even a little finger, much less a leg, in order to gain admittance to Himis Monastery, where I am now staying for a few days, enjoying the kind hospitality of the Chief Lama (or Abbot), the same gentleman who, according to M. Notovitch, nursed him so kindly under the painful circumstances connected with his memorable visit.
Coming to Himis with an entirely open mind on the question, and in no way biassed by the formation of a previous judgment, I was fully prepared to find that M. Notovitch's narrative was correct, and to congratulate him on his marvellous discovery. One matter of detail, entirely unconnected with the genuineness of the Russian traveller's literary discovery, shook my faith slightly in the general veracity of the discoverer.
Daring his journey up the Sind Valley M. Notovitch was beset on all sides by 'panthers, tigers, leopards, black bears, wolves, and jackals.' A panther ate one of his coolies near the village of Haïena before his very eyes, and black bears blocked his path in an aggressive manner. Some of the old inhabitants of Haïena told me that they had never seen or heard of a panther or tiger in the neighbourhood, and they had never heard of any coolie, travelling with a European sahib, who had lost his life in the way described. They were sure that such an event had not happened within the last ten years. I was informed by a gentleman of large experience in big-game shooting in Kashmir that such an experience as that of M. Notovitch was quite unprecedented, even in 1887, within thirty miles of the capital of Kashmir.
During my journey up the Sind Valley the only wild animal I saw was a red bear of such retiring disposition that I could not get near enough for a shot.
In Ladakh I was so fortunate as to bag an ibex with thirty-eight-inch horns, called somewhat contemptuously by the Russian author 'wild goats;' but it is not fair to the Ladakhis to assert, as M. Notovitch does, that the pursuit of this animal is the principal occupation of the men of the country. Ibex are now so scarce near the Leh-Srinagar road that it is fortunate that this is not the case. M. Notovitch pursued his path undeterred by trifling discouragements, 'prepared,' as he tells us, ' for the discovery of a Life of Christ among the Buddhists.'
In justice to the imaginative author I feel bound to say that I have no evidence that M. Notovitch has not visited Himis Monastery. On the contrary, the Chief Lama, or Chagzot, of Himis |669 does distinctly remember that several European gentlemen visited the monastery in the years 1887 and 1888.
I do not attach much importance to the venerable Lama's declaration, before the Commissioner of Ladakh, to the effect that no Russian gentleman visited the monastery in the years named, because I have reason to believe that the Lama was not aware at the time of the appearance of a person of Russian nationality, and on being shown the photograph of M. Notovitch confesses that he might have mistaken him for an 'English sahib.' It appears certain that this venerable Abbot could not distinguish at a glance between a Russian and other European or American traveller.
The declaration of the 'English lady at Leh,' and of the British officers, mentioned by Professor Max Millier, was probably founded on the fact that no such name as Notovitch occurs in the list of European travellers kept at the dâk bungalow in Leh, where M. Notovitch says that he resided during his stay in that place. Careful inquiries have elicited the fact that a Russian gentleman named Notovitch was treated by the medical officer of Leh Hospital, Dr. Karl Marks, when suffering not from a broken leg, but from the less romantic but hardly less painful complaint----toothache.
I will now call attention to several leading statements in M. Notovitch's book, all of which will be found to be definitely contradicted in the document signed by the Chief Superior of Himis Monastery, and sealed with his official seal. This statement I have sent to Professor Max Müller for inspection, together with the subjoined declaration of Mr. Joldan, an educated Tibetan gentleman, to whose able assistance I am deeply indebted.
A more patient and painstaking interpreter could not be found, nor one better fitted for the task.
The extracts from M. Notovitch's book were slowly translated to the Lama, and were thoroughly understood by him. The questions and answers were fully discussed at two lengthy interviews before being prepared as a document for signature, and when so prepared were carefully translated again to the Lama by Mr. Joldan, and discussed by him with that gentleman, and with a venerable monk who appeared to act as the Lama's private secretary.
I may here say that I have the fullest confidence in the veracity and honesty of this old and respected Chief Lama, who appears to be held in the highest esteem, not only among Buddhists, but by all Europeans who have made his acquaintance. As he says, he has nothing whatever to gain by the concealment of facts, or by any departure from the truth.
His indignation at the manner in which he has been travestied by the ingenious author was of far too genuine a character to be feigned, and I was much interested when, in our final interview, he asked me if in Europe there existed no means of punishing a person |670 who told such untruths. I could only reply that literary honesty is taken for granted to such an extent in Europe, that literary forgery of the nature committed by M. Notovitch could not, I believed, be punished by our criminal law.
With reference to M. Notovitch's declaration that he is going to Himis to verify the statements made in his book, I would take the liberty of earnestly advising him, if he does so, to disguise himself at least as effectually as on the occasion of his former visit. M. Notovitch will not find himself popular at Himis, and might not gain admittance, even on the pretext of having another broken leg.
The following extracts have been carefully selected from the Unknown Life of Christ, and are such that on their truth or falsehood may be said to depend the value of M. Notovitch's story.
After describing at length the details of a dramatic performance, said to have been witnessed in the courtyard of Himis Monastery, M. Notovitch writes:
A fter having crossed the courtyard and ascended a staircase lined with prayer-wheels, we passed through two rooms encumbered with idols, and came out upon the terrace, where I seated myself on a bench opposite the venerable Lama, whose eyes flashed with intelligence (p. 110).
(This extract is important as bearing on the question of identification; see Answers 1 and 2 of the Lama's statement: and it may here be remarked that the author's account of the approach to the Chief Lama's reception room and balcony is accurate.) Then follows a long résumé of a conversation on religious matters, in the course of which the Abbot is said to have made the following observations amongst others:
We have a striking example of this (Nature-worship) in the ancient Egyptians, who worshipped animals, trees, and stones, the winds and the rain (p. 114).
The Assyrians, in seeking the way which should lead them to the feet of the Creator, turned their eyes to the stars (p. 115).
Perhaps the people of Israel have demonstrated in a more flagrant manner than any other, man's love for the concrete (p. 115).
The name of Issa is held in great respect by the Buddhists, but little is known about him save by the Chief Lamas who have read the scrolls relating to his life (p. 120).
The documents brought from India to Nepal, and from Nepal to Tibet, concerning Issa's existence, are written in the Pâli language, and are now in Lassa; but a copy in our language----that is, the Tibetan----exists in this convent (p. 123).
Two days later I sent by a messenger to the Chief Lama a present comprising an alarum, a watch, and a thermometer (p. 125).
We will now pass on to the description given by the author of his re-entry into the monastery with a broken leg:
I was carried with great care to the best of their chambers, and placed on a bed of soft materials, near to which stood a prayer-wheel. All this took place under the immediate surveillance of the Superior, who affectionately pressed the hand I offered him in gratitude for his kindness (p. 127).
While a youth of the convent kept in motion the prayer-wheel near my bed, |671 the venerable Superior entertained me with endless stories, constantly taking my alarum and watch from their cases, and putting me questions as to their uses, and the way they should be worked. At last, acceding to my earnest entreaties, he ended by bringing me two large bound volumes, with leaves yellowed by time, and from them he read to me, in the Tibetan language, the biography of Issa, which I carefully noted in my carnet de voyage, as my interpreter translated what he said (p. 128).
This last extract is in a sense the most important of all, as will be seen when it is compared with Answers 3, 4, and 5 in the statement of the Chief Superior of Himis Monastery. That statement I now append. The original is in the hands of Professor Max Müller, as I have said, as also is the appended declaration of Mr. Joldan, of Leh.
The statement of the Lama, if true----and there is every reason to believe it to be so----disposes once and for ever of M. Notovitch's claim to have discovered a Life of Issa among the Buddhists of Ladakh. My questions to the Lama were framed briefly, and with as much simplicity as possible, so that there might be no room for any mistake or doubt respecting the meaning of these questions.
My interpreter. Mr. Joldan, tells me that he was most careful to translate the Lama's answers verbally and literally, to avoid all possible misapprehension. The statement is as follows:
Question 1. You are the Chief Lama (or Abbot) of Himis Monastery?
Answer 1. Yes.
Question 2. For how long have you acted continuously in that capacity?
Answer 2. For fifteen years.
Question 3. Have you or any of the Buddhist monks in this monastery ever seen here a European with an injured leg?
Answer 3. No, not during the last fifteen years. If any sahib suffering from serious injury had stayed in this monastery it would have been my duty to report the matter to the Wazir of Leh. I have never had occasion to do so.
Question 4. Have you or any of your monks ever shown any Life of Issa to any sahib, and allowed him to copy and translate the same?
Answer 4. There is no such book in the monastery, and during my term of office no sahib has been allowed to copy or translate any of the manuscripts in the monastery.
Question 5. Are you aware of the existence of any book in any of the Buddhist monasteries of Tibet bearing on the life of Issa?
Answer 5. I have been for forty-two years a Lama, and am well acquainted with all the well-known Buddhist books and manuscripts, and I have never heard of one which mentions the name of Issa, and it is my firm and honest belief that none such exists. I have inquired of our principal Lamas in other monasteries of Tibet, and they are not acquainted with any books or manuscripts which mention the name of Issa.
Question 6. M. Nicolas Notovitch, a Russian gentleman who visited |672 your monastery between seven and eight years ago, states that you discussed with him the religions of the ancient Egyptians, Assyrians, and the people of Israel.
Answer 6. I know nothing whatever about the Egyptians, Assyrians, and the people of Israel, and do not know anything of their religions whatsoever. I have never mentioned these peoples to any sahib.
[I was reading M. Notovitch's book to the Lama at the time, and he burst out with, 'Sun, sun, sun, manna mi dug!' which is Tibetan for, 'Lies, lies, lies, nothing but lies!' I have read this to him as part of the statement which he is to sign----as his deliberate opinion of M. Notovitch's book. He appears perfectly satisfied on the matter. J. A. D.]
Question 7. Do you know of any Buddhist writings in the Pâli language?
Answer 7. I know of no Buddhist writings in the Pâli langage; all the writings here, that I know of, have been translated from Sanskrit and Hindi into the Tibetan language.
[From this answer, and other observations of the Lama, it would appear that he is not acquainted with the term 'Pâli.'----J. A. D. ]
Question 8. Have you received from any sahib a present of a watch, an alarum, and a thermometer?
Answer 8. I have never received any such presents from any sahib. I do not know what a thermometer is. I am sure that I have not one in my possession.
[This answer was given after a careful explanation of the nature of the articles in question.----J. A. D.]
Question 9. Do you speak Urdu or English?
Answer 9. I do not know either Urdu or English.
Question 10. Is the name of Issa held in great respect by the Buddhists?
Answer 10. They know nothing even of his name; none of the Lamas has ever heard it, save through missionaries and European sources.
Signed in the Tibetan language by the Chief Lama of Himis, and sealed with his official seal.
In the presence of us
J. Archibald Douglas, Professor, Government College, Agra, N.-W. P.
Shahmwell Joldan, late Postmaster of Ladakh.
Himis Monastery, Little Tibet: June 3, 1895.
(Mr. Joldan's Declaration)
This is my declaration: That I acted as interpreter for Professor Douglas in his interviews with the Chief Lama of Hiinis Monastery.
I can speak English, and Tibetan is my native language. The questions and answers to which the Chief Lama has appended his seal and signature were thoroughly understood by him, and I have the fullest confidence in his absolute veracity.
Shahmwell Joldan
(Retired Postmaster of Ladakh
under the British Imperial Post Office).
Leh: June 5, 1895.
This statement and declaration appear conclusive, and they are confirmed by my own inquiries, and by those made in my presence by the Abbot of Hirnis of some of the monks who have been longest resident in the monastery. There is every reason for believing that the conversations with the Lamas of Wokka and Lamayuru originated also in the fertile brain of M. Notovitch.
Neither of these reverend Abbots remembers anything about the Russian traveller, and they know nothing of the religion of Issa (Christianity) or of any Buddhist sacred books or writings which mention his name.
I would here remark that the Lamas of Ladakh are not a garrulous race, and I have never known them indulge in high-flown platitudes on any subject. The casual reader would judge from a perusal of M. Notovitch's 'conversations' with them, that they were as much addicted to pompous generalities as the orators of youthful debating societies. The Lamas I have met are prepared to answer rational inquiries courteously. They do so with brevity, and usually to the point. They confess willingly that their knowledge on religious subjects is limited to their own religion, and that they know nothing whatever of religious systems unconnected with Tibetan Buddhism. They do not read any languages but Sanskrit and Tibetan, and their conversations with foreigners are altogether limited to commonplace topics. The Chief Lama of Himis had never heard of the existence of the Egyptians or of the Assyrians, and his indignation at M. Notovitch's statement that he had discussed their religious beliefs was so real, that he almost seemed to imagine that M. Notovitch had accused him of saying something outrageously improper.
The exclusiveness of the Buddhism of Lassa seems to have instilled into the minds of the Lamaïstes an instinctive shrinking from foreign customs and ideas.
I would call attention especially to the ninth answer in the Lama's statement, in which he disclaims all knowledge of the English and Urdu languages.
The question arises, 'Who was M. Notovitch's interpreter?' The Tibetans of Ladakh competent to interpret such a conversation are leading men, certainly not more than three or four in number. Not one of them has ever seen M. Notovitch, to his knowledge. What does our imaginative author tell about this detail? On page |673 35 of the English edition, we are informed that at the village of Groond (thirty-six miles from Srinagar) he took a shikari into his service 'who fulfilled the rôle of interpreter.' Of all the extraordinary statements with which this book abounds, this appears to us the most marvellous. A Kashmiri shikari is invariably a simple peasant, whose knowledge of language is limited to his native tongue, and a few words of Urdu and English, relating to the necessities of the road, the camp and sport, picked up from English sportscaen and their Hindu attendants.
Even in his own language no Kashmiri villager would be likely to be able to express religious and philosophical ideas such as are contained in the 'conversations' between M. Notovitch and the Lamas. These ideas are foreign to the Kashmiri mode of thought, usually limited to what our author would term 'things palpable.'
We will take one or two examples:
Part of the spirituality of our Lord (p. 33);
Essential principles of monotheism (p. 51);
An intermediary between earth and heaven (p. 51);
used in the 'conversation' with the Abbot of Wokka on the journey to Leh. The conversations at Himis abound in even more magnificent expressions:
Idols which they regarded as neutral to their surroundings (p. 114);
The attenuation of the divine principle (p. 115);
The dominion of things palpable (p. 115);
A canonical part of Buddhism (p. 1:34);
and many others which readers will have no difficulty in finding.
Few things have amused me more, in connexion with this inquiry, than the half-annoyed, half-amused expression of the venerable Lama's face when Mr. Joldan, after a careful explanation from me, did his best to translate into Tibetan, as elegantly as it deserves, the expression 'the attenuation of the divine principle.'
Apart, then, altogether from the statement made by the old Abbot, there are ample reasons for doubting the veracity of M. Notovitch's narrative.
In my last conversation with the Lama we talked of the story of the broken leg. He assured me that no European gentleman had ever been nursed in the monastery while suffering from a broken limb, and then went on to say that no European traveller had ever during his term of office remained at Himis for more than three days. The Abbot called in several old monks to confirm this statement, and mentioned that the hospitality offered by the monastery to travellers is for one night, and is only extended for special reasons by his personal invitation, and that he and his monks would not have forgotten so unusual a circumstance.
That M. Notovitch may have injured his leg after leaving Leh on |674 the road to Srinagar is possible, but the whole story of the broken leg, in so far as it relates to Himis Monastery, is neither more nor less than a fiction.
The Lamaïstes of Ladakh are divided into two great parties: the red monks, or orthodox conservative body; and the yellow monks, a reforming nonconformist sect.
On p. 119 of the Unknown Life of Christ, the Lama of Himis, the Chief Superior under the Dalai Lama of the red or orthodox monks of Ladakh, describes himself and his fellow-monks as 'we yellow monks,' in one of those wonderful conversations before alluded to. It would be just as natural for his Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury, discussing the state of the English Church with an unsophisticated foreigner, to describe himself and the whole bench of bishops as 'we ministers of the Wesleyan Methodist body.' The Russian traveller might have remembered the dark-red robes and the red wallets of the monks who fill the monastery of Himis, unless it be that the Russian author is colour-blind, as well as blind to a sense of truth. The religious differences of these two religious bodies are described with an inaccuracy so marvellous that it might almost seem to be intentional.
Regarded, then, in the light of a work of the imagination, M. Notovitch's book fails to please, because it does not present that most fascinating feature of fiction, a close semblance of probability.
And yet, if I am rightly informed, the French version has gone through eleven editions; so M. Notovitch's effort of imagination has found, doubtless, a substantial reward. In face of the evidence adduced, we must reject the theory generously put forward by Professor Max Müller, that M. Notovitch was the victim of a cunning 'hoax ' on the part of the Buddhist monks of Himis.
I do not believe that the venerable monk who presides over Himis Monastery would have consented to the practice of such a deception, and I do not think that any of the monks are capable of carrying out such a deception successfully. The departures from truth, on other points, which can be proved against M. Notovitch render such a solution highly improbable.
The preface which is attached to the English edition under the form of a letter 'To the Publishers' is a bold defence of the truth of M. Notovitch's story, but it does not contain a single additional argument in favour of the authenticity of the Life of Issa.
A work of brilliant imagination is entitled to respect when it confesses itself as such, but when it is boldly and solemnly asserted again and again to be truth and fact, it is rightly designated by a harsher term. The Life of Issa is not a simple biography. Such a publication, though a literary forgery, might be considered comparatively harmless. This Life of Issa contains two very striking departures from Christian revelation, as accepted by the vast majority of those |675 who confess the faith of Christ. It practically denies the working of miracles, and it also gives a definite denial to the resurrection of Jesus. To the first of these denials is given no less authority than the word's of our Lord, while the second more important article of faith is explained away very much to the discredit of the Apostles of the Early Church. M. Notovitch must remain, therefore, under the burden of what will be in the eyes of many people a more serious charge than literary forgery, and persistent untruthfulness. He has attempted wilfully to pervert Christian truth, and has endeavoured to invest that perversion with a shield of Divine authority.
I am not a religious teacher, and, great as is my respect for Christian missionaries, I cannot profess any enthusiastic sympathy with their methods and immediate aims. M. Notovitch cannot therefore charge me with 'missionary prejudice' or 'obstinate sectarianism.'
But, in the name of common honesty, what must be said of M. Notovitch's statement, that his version of the Life of Issa 'has many more chances of being conformable to the truth than the accounts of the evangelists, the composition of which, effected at different epochs, and at a time ulterior to the events, may have contributed in a large measure to distort the facts and to alter their sense.'
Another daring departure from the New Testament account is that the blame of Christ's crucifixion is cast on the Roman governor Pilate, who is represented as descending to the suborning of false witnesses to excuse the unjust condemnation of Jesus.
The Jewish chief priests and people are represented as deeply attached to the great Preacher, whom they regarded as a possible deliverer from Roman tyranny, and as endeavouring to save Him from the tyrannical injustice of Pilate. This remarkable perversion of the received account has led several people to ask if the author of the Unknown Life of Christ is of Jewish extraction. Such inquiries as I have been able to make are not, however, in favour of such a supposition.
In many respects it may be said that this 'Gospel according to M. Notovitch' bears a resemblance to the Vie de Jésus by Renan, to whom the Russian author states that he showed his manuscripts.
We believe, nevertheless, that the great French author possessed too much perspicacity to be deceived by the 'discovery,' and too much honesty to accept support of his views from such a dubious quarter.
The general question as to the probability of the existence of any Life of Issa among the Buddhist manuscripts in the monasteries of Tibet has been already so ably dealt with by so great an authority on these matters as Professor Max Müller, that I feel it would be presumptuous on my part to attempt to deal with a subject in which |676 I am but slightly versed. I will therefore content myself by saying that the statements of the Lama of Himis, and conversations with other Lamas, entirely bear out Professor Max Müller's contention that no such Life of Issa exists in Thibet.
In conclusion, I would refer to two items of the Russian author's defence of his work. The first is that in which he boldly invites his detractors to visit Himis, and there ascertain the truth or falsehood of his story; the second that passage in which he requests his critics 'to restrict themselves to this simple question: Did those passages exist in the monastery of Himis, and have I faithfully reproduced their substance?'
Otherwise he informs the world in general no one has any 'honest' right to criticise his discovery. I have visited Himis, and have endeavoured by patient and impartial inquiry to find out the truth respecting M. Notovitch's remarkable story, with the result that, while I have not found one single fact to support his statements, all the weight of evidence goes to disprove them beyond all shadow of doubt. It is certain that no such passages as M. Notovitch pretends to have translated exist in the monastery of Himis, and therefore it is impossible that he could have 'faithfully reproduced' the same.
The general accuracy of my statements respecting my interviews with the Lama of Himis can further be borne out by reference to Captain Chevenix Trench, British Commissioner of Ladakh,2 who is due to visit Himis about the end of the present month, and who has expressed to me his intention of discussing the subject with the Chief Lama.
Before concluding, I desire to acknowledge my sense of obligation to the Wazir of Leh, to the Chief Lama and monks of Himis Monastery, to my excellent interpreter, and to other kind friends in Ladakh, not only for the able assistance which they afforded to me in my investigations, but also for the unfailing courtesy and kind hospitality which rendered so enjoyable my visit to Ladakh.
J. Archibald Douglas.
June 1893.
POSTSCRIPT
BY PROFESSOR MAX MÜLLER
Although I was convinced that the story told by M. Notovitch in this Vie inconnue de Jésus-Christ 3 was pure fiction, I thought it |677 fair, when writing my article in the October number of this Review, 1894, to give him the benefit of a doubt, and to suggest that he might possib]y have been hoaxed by Buddhist priests from whom he professed to have gathered his information about Issa, i.e. Jesus. (Isa is the name for Jesus used by Mohammedans.) Such things have happened before. Inquisitive travellers have been supplied with the exact information which they wanted by Mahàtmas and other religious authorities, whether in Tibet or India, or even among Zulus and Red Indians. It seemed a long cry to Leh in Ladakh, and in throwing out in an English review this hint that M. Notovitch might have been hoaxed, I did not think that the Buddhist priests in the Monastery of Himis, in Little Tibet, might be offended by my remarks. After having read, however, the foregoing article by Professor Douglas, I feel bound most humbly to apologise to the excellent Lamas of that monastery for having thought them capable of such frivolity. After the conrplete refutation, or, I should rather say, annihilation, of M. Notovitch by Professor A. Douglas, there does not seem to be any further necessity----nay, any excuse----for trying to spare the feelings of that venturesome Russian traveller. He was not hoaxed, but he tried to hoax us. Mr. Douglas has sent me the original papers, containing the depositions of the Chief Priest of the Monastery of Him is and of his interpreter, and I gladly testify that they entirely agree with the extracts given in the article, and are-signed and sealed by the Chief Lama and by Mr. Joldan, formerly Postmaster of Ladakh, who acted as interpreter between the priests and Professor A. Douglas. The papers are dated Himis Monastery, Little Tibet, June 3, 1894.
I ought perhaps to add that I cannot claim any particular merit in having proved the Vie inconnue de Jésus-Christ----that is, the Life of Christ taken from MSS. in the monasteries of Tibet----to be a mere fiction. I doubt whether any Sanskrit or Pâli scholar, in fact any serious student of Buddhism, was taken in by M. Notovitch. One might as well look for the waters of Jordan in the Brahmaputra as. for a Life of Christ in Tibet.
F. Max Müller.
November 15, 1895.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. 1 Nicolas Notovitch, La Vie inconnue de Jésus-Christ. (Paris, 1894)
2. 1 This paper was written at Himis in June 1895.----J. A D.
3. 2 Paris: P. Ollendorff, 2e éd. 1894.
http://www.tertullian.org/rpearse/scanned/notovitch.htm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Nineteenth Century, 36 (July-December 1894) pp. 515-522
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE ALLEGED SOJOURN OF CHRIST IN INDIA 1
Aeneas Sylvius, afterwards Pope Pius the Second, 1458-64, when on a visit to England, was anxious to see with his own eyes the barnacle geese that were reported to grow on trees, and, being supposed to be vegetable rather than animal, were allowed to be eaten during Lent. He went as far as Scotland to see them, but when arrived there he was told that he must go further, to the Orchades, if he wished to see these miraculous geese. He seemed rather provoked at this, and, complaining that miracles would always flee further and further, he gave up his goose chase (didicimus miracula semper remotius fugere).
Since his time, the number of countries in which miracles and mysteries could find a safe hiding-place has been much reduced. If there were a single barnacle goose left in the Orchades, i.e. the Orkney Islands, tourists would by this time have given a good account of it. There are few countries left now beyond the reach of steamers or railways, and if there is a spot never trodden by a European foot, that is the very spot which is sure to be fixed upon by some adventurous members of the Alpine Club for their next expedition. Even Central Asia and Central Africa are no longer safe, and, hence, no doubt, the great charm which attaches to a country like Tibet, now almost the only country some parts of which are still closed against European explorers. It was in Tibet, therefore, that Madame Blavatsky met her Mahâtmas, who initiated her in the mysteries of Esoteric Buddhism. Mr. Sinnet claims to have followed in her footsteps, but has never described his or her route. Of course, if Madame Blavatsky and Mr. Sinnet had only told us by what passes they entered Tibet from India, at what stations they halted, and in what language they communicated with the Mahâtmas, it would not be courteous to ask any further questions. That there are Mahâtmas in India and Tibet no one would venture to deny. The only doubt is whether these real Mahâtmas know, or profess to know, anything beyond what they can, and what we can, learn from their sacred literature. If so, they have only to give the authorities to which they appeal for their esoteric knowledge, and we shall know at |516 once whether they are right or wrong. Their Sacred Canon is accessible to us as it is to them, and we could, therefore, very easily come to an understanding with them as to what they mean by Esoteric Buddhism. Their Sacred Canon exists in Sanskrit, in Chinese, and in Tibetan, and no Sacred Canon is so large and has at the same time been so minutely catalogued as that of the Buddhists in India, China, or Tibet.
But though certain portions of Tibet, and particularly the capital (Lassa), are still inaccessible, at least to English travellers from India, other portions of it, and the countries between it and India, are becoming more and more frequented by adventurous tourists. It would therefore hardly be safe to appeal any longer to unknown Mahâtmas, or to the monks of Tibetan monasteries, for wild statements about Buddhism, esoteric or otherwise, for a letter addressed to these monasteries, or to English officials in the neighbourhood, would at once bring every information that could be desired. "Where detection was so easy, it is almost impossible to believe that a Russian traveller, M. Notovitch, who has lately published a 'Life of Christ' dictated to him by Buddhist priests in the Himis Monastery, near Leh, in Ladakh, should, as his critics maintain, have invented not only the whole of this Vie inconnue de Jésus-Christ, but the whole of his journey to Ladakh. It is no doubt unfortunate that M. Notovitch lost the photographs which he took on the way, but such a thing may happen, and if an author declares that he has travelled from Kashmir to Ladakh one can hardly summon courage to doubt his word. It is certainly strange that letters should have been received not only from missionaries, but lately from English officers also passing through Leh, who, after making careful inquiries on the spot, declare that no Russian gentleman of the name of Notovitch ever passed through Leh, and that no traveller with a broken leg was ever nursed in the monastery of Himis. But M. Notovitch may have travelled in disguise, and he will no doubt be able to prove through his publisher, M. Paul Ollendorf, how both the Moravian missionaries and the English officers were misinformed by the Buddhist priests of the monastery of Leh. The monastery of Himis has often been visited, and there is a very full description of it in the works of the brothers Schlagintweit on Tibet.
But, taking it for granted that M. Notovitch is a gentleman and not a liar, we cannot help thinking that the Buddhist monks of Ladakh and Tibet must be wags, who enjoy mystifying inquisitive travellers, and that M. Notovitch fell far too easy a victim to their jokes. Possibly, the same excuse may apply to Madame Blavatsky, who was fully convinced that her friends, the Mahâtmas of Tibet, sent her letters to Calcutta, not by post, but through the air, letters which she showed to her friends, and which were written, not on Mahâtmic paper and with Mahâtmic ink, but on English paper and |517 with English ink. Be that as it may, M. Notovitch is not the first traveller in the East to whom Brâhmans or Buddhists have supplied, for a consideration, the information and even the manuscripts which they were in search of. Wilford's case ought to have served as a warning, but we know it did not serve as a warning to M. Jacolliot when he published his Bible dans l'Inde from Sanskrit originals, supplied to him by learned Pandits at Chandranagor. Madame Blavatsky, if I remember rightly, never even pretended to have received Tibetan manuscripts, or, if she had, neither she nor Mr. Sinnet have ever seen fit to publish either the text or an English translation of these treasures.
But M. Notovitch, though he did not bring the manuscripts home, at all events saw them, and not pretending to a knowledge of Tibetan, had the Tibetan text translated by an interpreter, and has published seventy pages of it in French in his Vie inconnue de Jésus-Christ. He was evidently prepared for the discovery of a Life of Christ among the Buddhists. Similarities between Christianity and Buddhism have frequently been pointed out of late, and the idea that Christ was influenced by Buddhist doctrines has more than once been put forward by popular writers. The difficulty has hitherto been to discover any real historical channel through which Buddhism could have reached Palestine at the time of Christ. M. Notovitch thinks that the manuscript which he found at Himis explains the matter in the simplest way. There is no doubt, as he says, a gap in the life of Christ, say from his fifteenth to his twenty-ninth year. During that very time the new Life found in Tibet asserts that Christ was in India, that he studied Sanskrit and Pâli, that he read the Vedas and the Buddhist Canon, and then returned through Persia to Palestine to preach the Gospel. If we understand M. Notovitch rightly, this Life of Christ was taken down from the mouths of some Jewish merchants who came to India immediately after the Crucifixion (p. 237). It was written down in Pâli, the sacred language of Southern Buddhism; the scrolls were afterwards brought from India to Nepaul and Makhada (quaere Magadha) about 200 a.d. (p. 236), and from Nepaul to Tibet, and are at present carefully preserved at Lassa. Tibetan translations of the Pâli text are found, he says, in various Buddhist monasteries, and, among the rest, at Himis. It is these Tibetan manuscripts which were translated at Himis for M. Notovitch while he was laid up in the monastery with a broken leg, and it is from these manuscripts that he has taken his new Life of Jesus Christ and published it in French, with an account of his travels. This volume, which has already passed through several editions in France, is soon to be translated into English.
There is a certain plausibility about all this. The language of Magadha, and of Southern Buddhism in general, was certainly Pâli, and Buddhism reached Tibet through Nepaul. But M. Notovitch ought to |518 have been somewhat startled and a little more sceptical when he was told that the Jewish merchants who arrived in India immediately after the Crucifixion knew not only what had happened to Christ in Palestine, but also what had happened to Jesus, or Issa, while he spent fifteen years of his life among the Brâhmans and Buddhists in India, learning Sanskrit and Pâli, and studying the Vedas and the Tripitaka. With all their cleverness the Buddhist monks would have found it hard to answer the question, how these Jewish merchants met the very people who had known Issa as a casual student of Sanskrit and Pâli in India ----for India is a large term----and still more, how those who had known Issa as a simple student in India, saw at once that he was the same person who had been put to death under Pontius Pilate. Even his name was not quite the same. His name in India is said to have been Issa, very like the Arabic name Isâ'l Masîh, Jesus, the Messiah, while, strange to say, the name of Pontius Pilate seems to have remained unchanged in its passage from Hebrew to Pâli, and from Pâli to Tibetan. We must remember that part of Tibet was converted to Mohammedanism. So much for the difficulty as to the first composition of the Life of Issa in Pâli, the joint work of Jewish merchants and the personal friends of Christ in India, whether in Sind or at Benares. Still greater, however, is the difficulty of the Tibetan translation of that Life having been preserved for so many centuries without ever being mentioned. If M. Notovitch had been better acquainted with the Buddhist literature of Tibet and China, he would never have allowed his Buddhist hosts to tell him that this Life of Jesus was -well known in Tibetan literature, though read by the learned only. We possess excellent catalogues of manuscripts and books of the Buddhists in Tibet and in China. A complete catalogue of the Tripitaka or the Buddhist Canon in Chinese has been translated into English by a pupil of mine, the Rev. Bunyiu Nanjio, M.A., and published by the Clarendon Press in 1883. It contains no less than 1,662 entries. The Tibetan Catalogue is likewise a most wonderful performance, and has been published in the Asiatic Researches, vol. xx., by Csoma Körösi, the famous Hungarian traveller, who spent years in the monasteries of Tibet and became an excellent Tibetan scholar. It has lately been republished by M. Féer in the Annales du Musée Guimet. This Catalogue is not confined to what we should call sacred or canonical books, it contains everything that was considered old and classical in Tibetan literature. There are two collections, the Kandjur and the Tandjur. The Kandjur consists of 108 large volumes, arranged in seven divisions:
1. Dulva, discipline (Vinaya).
2. Sherch'hin, wisdom (Pragnâpâramitâ).
3. P'hal-ch'hen, the garland of Buddhas (Buddha-avatansaka).
4. Kon-tségs, mountain of treasures (Ratnakûta).
5. Mdo, or Sûtras, aphorisms (Sûtrânta). |519
6. Myang-Hdas, or final emancipation (Nirvâna).
7. Gryut, Tantra or mysticism (Tantra).
'The Tandjur consists of 225 volumes, and while the Kandjur is supposed to contain the Word of Buddha, the Tandjur contains many books on grammar, philosophy, &c, which, though recognised as part of the Canon, are in no sense sacred.
In the Tandjur, therefore, if not in the Kandjur, the story of Issa ought to have its place, and if M. Notovitch had asked his Tibetan friends to give him at least a reference to that part of the Catalogue where this story might be found, he would at once have discovered that they were trying to dupe him. Two things in their account are impossible, or next to impossible. The first, that the Jews from Palestine who came to India in about 35 a.d. should have met the very people who had known Issa when he was a student at Benares; the second, that this Sutra of Issa, composed in the first century of our era, should not have found a place either in the Kandjur or in the Tandjur.
It might, of course, be said, Why should the Buddhist monks of Himis have indulged in this mystification?----but we know as a fact that Pandits in India, when hard pressed, have allowed themselves the same liberty with such men as Wilford and Jacolliot; why should not the Buddhist monks of Himis have done the same for M. Notovitch, who was determined to find a Life of Jesus Christ in Tibet? If this explanation, the only one I can think of, be rejected, nothing would remain but to accuse M. Notovitch, not simply of a mauvaise plaisanterie, but of a disgraceful fraud; and that seems a strong measure to adopt towards a gentleman who represents himself as on friendly terms with Cardinal Rotelli, M. Jules Simon, and E. Renan.
And here I must say that if there is anything that might cause misgivings in our mind as to M. Notovitch's trustworthiness, it is the way in which he speaks of his friends. When a Cardinal at Rome dissuades him from publishing his book, and also kindly offers to assist him, he hints that this was simply a bribe, and that the Cardinal wished to suppress the book. Why should he? If the story of Issa were historically true, it would remove many difficulties. It would show once for all that Jesus was a real and historical character. The teaching ascribed to him in Tibet is much the same as what is found in the Gospels, and if there are some differences, if more particularly the miraculous element is almost entirely absent, a Cardinal of the Roman Catholic Church would always have the tradition of the Church to rest on, and would probably have been most grateful for the solid historical framework supplied by the Tibetan Life.
M. Notovitch is equally uncharitable in imputing motives to the late M. Renan, who seems to have received him most kindly and to have offered to submit his discovery to the Academy. M. Notovitch |520 says that he never called on Renan again, but actually waited for his death, because he was sure that M. Renan would have secured the best part of the credit for himself, leaving to M. Notovitch nothing but the good luck of having discovered the Tibetan manuscript at Himis. Whatever else Renan was, he certainly was far from jealous, and he would have acted towards M. Notovitch in the same spirit with which he welcomed the discoveries which Hamdy Bey lately made in Syria on the very ground which had been explored before by Renan himself. Many travellers who discover manuscripts, or inscriptions, or antiquities, are too apt to forget how much they owe to good luck and to the spades of their labourers, and that, though a man who disinters a buried city may be congratulated on his devotion and courage and perseverance, he does not thereby become a scholar or antiquary. The name of the discoverer of the Rosetta stone is almost forgotten, the name of the decipherer will be remembered for ever.
The worst treatment, however, is meted out to the missionaries in Tibet. It seems that they have written to say that M. Notovitch had never broken his leg or been nursed in the monastery of Himis. This is a point that can easily be cleared up, for there are at the present moment a number of English officers at Leh, and there is the doctor who either did or did not set the traveller's leg. M. Notovitch hints that the Moravian missionaries at Leh are distrusted by the people, and that the monks would never have shown them the manuscript containing the Life of Issa. Again I say, why not? If Issa was Jesus Christ, either the Buddhist monks and the Moravian missionaries would have seen that they both believed in the same teacher, or they might have thought that this new Life of Issa was even less exposed to objections than the Gospel story. But the worst comes at the end. 'How can I tell,' he writes, 'that these missionaries have not themselves taken away the documents of which I saw the copies at the Himis monastery?' But how could they, if the monks never showed them these manuscripts? M. Notovitch goes even further. 'This is simply a supposition of my own,' he writes, 'but, if it is true, only the copies have been made to disappear, and the originals have remained at Lassa. ... I propose to start at the end of the present year for Tibet, in order to find the original documents having reference to the life of Jesus Christ. I hope to succeed in this undertaking in spite of the wishes of the missionaries, for whom, however, I have never ceased to profess the profoundest respect.' Any one who can hint that these missionaries may have stolen and suppressed the only historical Life of Christ which is known to exist, and nevertheless express the profoundest respect for them, must not be surprised if the missionaries and their friends retaliate in the same spirit. We still prefer to suppose that M. Notovitch, like Lieutenant Wilford, like M. Jacolliot, like Madame Blavatsky and Mr. Sinnet, was duped. |521 It is pleasanter to believe that Buddhist monks can at times be wags, than that M. Notovitch is a rogue.
All this, no doubt, is very sad. How long have we wished for a real historical life of Christ without the legendary halo, written, not by one of his disciples, but by an independent eye-witness who had seen and heard Christ during the three years of his active life, and who had witnessed the Crucifixion and whatever happened afterwards? And now, when we seemed to have found such a Life, written by an eye-witness of his death, and free as yet from any miraculous accretions, it turns out to be an invention of a Buddhist monk at Himis, or, as others would have it, a fraud committed by an enterprising traveller and a bold French publisher. We must not lose patience. In these days of unexpected discoveries in Egypt and elsewhere, everything is possible. There is now at Vienna a fragment of the Gospel-story more ancient than the text of St. Mark. Other things may follow. Only let us hope that if such a Life were ever to be discovered, the attitude of Christian theologians would not be like that which M. Notovitch suspects on the part of an Italian Cardinal or of the Moravian missionaries at Himis, but that the historical Christ, though different from the Christ of the Gospels, would be welcomed by all who can believe in his teaching, even without the help of miracles.
F. Max Müller.
P.S.----It is curious that at the very time I was writing this paper I received a letter from an English lady dated Leh, Ladakh, June 29. She writes:
We left Leh two days ago, having enjoyed our stay there so much! There had been only one English lady here for over three years. Two German ladies live there, missionaries, a Mr. and Mrs. Weber----a girl, and another English missionary. They have only twenty Christians, though it has been a mission-station for seven years. We saw a polo match which was played down the principal street. Yesterday we were at the great Himis monastery, the largest Buddhist monastery up here----800 Lamas. Did you hear of a Russian who could not gain admittance to the monastery in any way, but at last broke his leg outside, and was taken in? His object was to copy a Buddhist Life of Christ which is there. He says he got it, and has published it since in French. There is not a single word of truth in the whole story! There has been no Russian there. No one has been taken into the Seminary for the past fifty years with a broken leg! There is no Life of Christ there at all! It is dawning on me that people who in England profess to have been living in Buddhist monasteries in Tibet and to have learnt there the mysteries of Esoteric Buddhism are frauds. The monasteries one and all are the most filthy places. The Lamas are the dirtiest of a very dirty race. They are fearfully ignorant, and idolaters pur et simple; no----neither pure nor simple. I have asked many travellers whom I have met, and they all tell the same story. They acknowledge that perhaps at the Lama University at Lassa it may be better, but no Englishman is allowed there. Captain Bower (the discoverer of the famous Bower MS.) did his very best to get there, but failed. . . . We are roughing it |522 now very much. I have not tasted bread for five weeks, and shall not for two months more. We have 'chappaties' instead. We rarely get any butter. We carry a little tinned butter, but it is too precious to eat much of. It was a great luxury to get some linen washed in Leh, though they did starch the sheets. "We are just starting on our 500 miles march to Simla. We hear that one pass is not open yet, about which we are very anxious. We have one pass of 18,000 feet to cross, and we shall be 13,000 feet high for over a fortnight; but I hope that by the time you get this we shall be down in beautiful Kulu, only one month from Simla!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Nineteenth Century, 39 (January-June 1896) pp. 667-677
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE CHIEF LAMA OF HIMIS ON THE ALLEGED 'UNKNOWN LIFE OF CHRIST'
It is difficult for any one resident in India to estimate accurately the importance of new departures in European literature, and to gauge the degree of acceptance accorded to a fresh literary discovery such as that which M. Notovitch claims to have made. A revelation of so surprising a nature could not, however, have failed to excite keen interest, not only among theologians and the religious public generally, but also among all who wish to acquire additional information respecting ancient religious systems and civilisations.
Under these circumstances it was not surprising to find in the October (1894) number of this Review an article from the able pen of Professor Max Müller dealing with the Russian traveller's marvellous 'find.'
I confess that, not having at the time had the pleasure of reading the book which forms the subject of this article, it seemed to me that the learned Oxford Professor was disposed to treat the discoverer somewhat harshly, in holding up the Unknown Life of Christ as a literary forgery, on evidence which did not then appear conclusive.
A careful perusal of the book made a less favourable impression of the genuineness of the discovery therein described; but my faith in M. Notovitch was somewhat revived by the bold reply which that gentleman made to his critics, to the effect that he is 'neither a "hoaxer" nor a "forger," ' and that he is about to undertake a fresh journey to Tibet to prove the truth of his story.
In the light of subsequent investigations, I am bound to say that the chief interest which attaches, in my mind, to M. Notovitch's daring defence of his book is the fact that that defence appeared immediately before the publication of an English translation of his work.
I was resident in Madras during the whole of last year, and did not expect to have an opportunity of investigating the facts respecting the Unknown Life of Christ at so early a date. Removing to the North-West Provinces in the early part of the present year, I |668 found that it would be practicable during the three months of the University vacation to travel through Kashmir to Ladakh, following the route taken by M. Notovitch, and to spend sufficient time at the monastery at Himis to learn the truth on this important question. I may here mention, en passant, that I did not find it necessary to break even a little finger, much less a leg, in order to gain admittance to Himis Monastery, where I am now staying for a few days, enjoying the kind hospitality of the Chief Lama (or Abbot), the same gentleman who, according to M. Notovitch, nursed him so kindly under the painful circumstances connected with his memorable visit.
Coming to Himis with an entirely open mind on the question, and in no way biassed by the formation of a previous judgment, I was fully prepared to find that M. Notovitch's narrative was correct, and to congratulate him on his marvellous discovery. One matter of detail, entirely unconnected with the genuineness of the Russian traveller's literary discovery, shook my faith slightly in the general veracity of the discoverer.
Daring his journey up the Sind Valley M. Notovitch was beset on all sides by 'panthers, tigers, leopards, black bears, wolves, and jackals.' A panther ate one of his coolies near the village of Haïena before his very eyes, and black bears blocked his path in an aggressive manner. Some of the old inhabitants of Haïena told me that they had never seen or heard of a panther or tiger in the neighbourhood, and they had never heard of any coolie, travelling with a European sahib, who had lost his life in the way described. They were sure that such an event had not happened within the last ten years. I was informed by a gentleman of large experience in big-game shooting in Kashmir that such an experience as that of M. Notovitch was quite unprecedented, even in 1887, within thirty miles of the capital of Kashmir.
During my journey up the Sind Valley the only wild animal I saw was a red bear of such retiring disposition that I could not get near enough for a shot.
In Ladakh I was so fortunate as to bag an ibex with thirty-eight-inch horns, called somewhat contemptuously by the Russian author 'wild goats;' but it is not fair to the Ladakhis to assert, as M. Notovitch does, that the pursuit of this animal is the principal occupation of the men of the country. Ibex are now so scarce near the Leh-Srinagar road that it is fortunate that this is not the case. M. Notovitch pursued his path undeterred by trifling discouragements, 'prepared,' as he tells us, ' for the discovery of a Life of Christ among the Buddhists.'
In justice to the imaginative author I feel bound to say that I have no evidence that M. Notovitch has not visited Himis Monastery. On the contrary, the Chief Lama, or Chagzot, of Himis |669 does distinctly remember that several European gentlemen visited the monastery in the years 1887 and 1888.
I do not attach much importance to the venerable Lama's declaration, before the Commissioner of Ladakh, to the effect that no Russian gentleman visited the monastery in the years named, because I have reason to believe that the Lama was not aware at the time of the appearance of a person of Russian nationality, and on being shown the photograph of M. Notovitch confesses that he might have mistaken him for an 'English sahib.' It appears certain that this venerable Abbot could not distinguish at a glance between a Russian and other European or American traveller.
The declaration of the 'English lady at Leh,' and of the British officers, mentioned by Professor Max Millier, was probably founded on the fact that no such name as Notovitch occurs in the list of European travellers kept at the dâk bungalow in Leh, where M. Notovitch says that he resided during his stay in that place. Careful inquiries have elicited the fact that a Russian gentleman named Notovitch was treated by the medical officer of Leh Hospital, Dr. Karl Marks, when suffering not from a broken leg, but from the less romantic but hardly less painful complaint----toothache.
I will now call attention to several leading statements in M. Notovitch's book, all of which will be found to be definitely contradicted in the document signed by the Chief Superior of Himis Monastery, and sealed with his official seal. This statement I have sent to Professor Max Müller for inspection, together with the subjoined declaration of Mr. Joldan, an educated Tibetan gentleman, to whose able assistance I am deeply indebted.
A more patient and painstaking interpreter could not be found, nor one better fitted for the task.
The extracts from M. Notovitch's book were slowly translated to the Lama, and were thoroughly understood by him. The questions and answers were fully discussed at two lengthy interviews before being prepared as a document for signature, and when so prepared were carefully translated again to the Lama by Mr. Joldan, and discussed by him with that gentleman, and with a venerable monk who appeared to act as the Lama's private secretary.
I may here say that I have the fullest confidence in the veracity and honesty of this old and respected Chief Lama, who appears to be held in the highest esteem, not only among Buddhists, but by all Europeans who have made his acquaintance. As he says, he has nothing whatever to gain by the concealment of facts, or by any departure from the truth.
His indignation at the manner in which he has been travestied by the ingenious author was of far too genuine a character to be feigned, and I was much interested when, in our final interview, he asked me if in Europe there existed no means of punishing a person |670 who told such untruths. I could only reply that literary honesty is taken for granted to such an extent in Europe, that literary forgery of the nature committed by M. Notovitch could not, I believed, be punished by our criminal law.
With reference to M. Notovitch's declaration that he is going to Himis to verify the statements made in his book, I would take the liberty of earnestly advising him, if he does so, to disguise himself at least as effectually as on the occasion of his former visit. M. Notovitch will not find himself popular at Himis, and might not gain admittance, even on the pretext of having another broken leg.
The following extracts have been carefully selected from the Unknown Life of Christ, and are such that on their truth or falsehood may be said to depend the value of M. Notovitch's story.
After describing at length the details of a dramatic performance, said to have been witnessed in the courtyard of Himis Monastery, M. Notovitch writes:
A fter having crossed the courtyard and ascended a staircase lined with prayer-wheels, we passed through two rooms encumbered with idols, and came out upon the terrace, where I seated myself on a bench opposite the venerable Lama, whose eyes flashed with intelligence (p. 110).
(This extract is important as bearing on the question of identification; see Answers 1 and 2 of the Lama's statement: and it may here be remarked that the author's account of the approach to the Chief Lama's reception room and balcony is accurate.) Then follows a long résumé of a conversation on religious matters, in the course of which the Abbot is said to have made the following observations amongst others:
We have a striking example of this (Nature-worship) in the ancient Egyptians, who worshipped animals, trees, and stones, the winds and the rain (p. 114).
The Assyrians, in seeking the way which should lead them to the feet of the Creator, turned their eyes to the stars (p. 115).
Perhaps the people of Israel have demonstrated in a more flagrant manner than any other, man's love for the concrete (p. 115).
The name of Issa is held in great respect by the Buddhists, but little is known about him save by the Chief Lamas who have read the scrolls relating to his life (p. 120).
The documents brought from India to Nepal, and from Nepal to Tibet, concerning Issa's existence, are written in the Pâli language, and are now in Lassa; but a copy in our language----that is, the Tibetan----exists in this convent (p. 123).
Two days later I sent by a messenger to the Chief Lama a present comprising an alarum, a watch, and a thermometer (p. 125).
We will now pass on to the description given by the author of his re-entry into the monastery with a broken leg:
I was carried with great care to the best of their chambers, and placed on a bed of soft materials, near to which stood a prayer-wheel. All this took place under the immediate surveillance of the Superior, who affectionately pressed the hand I offered him in gratitude for his kindness (p. 127).
While a youth of the convent kept in motion the prayer-wheel near my bed, |671 the venerable Superior entertained me with endless stories, constantly taking my alarum and watch from their cases, and putting me questions as to their uses, and the way they should be worked. At last, acceding to my earnest entreaties, he ended by bringing me two large bound volumes, with leaves yellowed by time, and from them he read to me, in the Tibetan language, the biography of Issa, which I carefully noted in my carnet de voyage, as my interpreter translated what he said (p. 128).
This last extract is in a sense the most important of all, as will be seen when it is compared with Answers 3, 4, and 5 in the statement of the Chief Superior of Himis Monastery. That statement I now append. The original is in the hands of Professor Max Müller, as I have said, as also is the appended declaration of Mr. Joldan, of Leh.
The statement of the Lama, if true----and there is every reason to believe it to be so----disposes once and for ever of M. Notovitch's claim to have discovered a Life of Issa among the Buddhists of Ladakh. My questions to the Lama were framed briefly, and with as much simplicity as possible, so that there might be no room for any mistake or doubt respecting the meaning of these questions.
My interpreter. Mr. Joldan, tells me that he was most careful to translate the Lama's answers verbally and literally, to avoid all possible misapprehension. The statement is as follows:
Question 1. You are the Chief Lama (or Abbot) of Himis Monastery?
Answer 1. Yes.
Question 2. For how long have you acted continuously in that capacity?
Answer 2. For fifteen years.
Question 3. Have you or any of the Buddhist monks in this monastery ever seen here a European with an injured leg?
Answer 3. No, not during the last fifteen years. If any sahib suffering from serious injury had stayed in this monastery it would have been my duty to report the matter to the Wazir of Leh. I have never had occasion to do so.
Question 4. Have you or any of your monks ever shown any Life of Issa to any sahib, and allowed him to copy and translate the same?
Answer 4. There is no such book in the monastery, and during my term of office no sahib has been allowed to copy or translate any of the manuscripts in the monastery.
Question 5. Are you aware of the existence of any book in any of the Buddhist monasteries of Tibet bearing on the life of Issa?
Answer 5. I have been for forty-two years a Lama, and am well acquainted with all the well-known Buddhist books and manuscripts, and I have never heard of one which mentions the name of Issa, and it is my firm and honest belief that none such exists. I have inquired of our principal Lamas in other monasteries of Tibet, and they are not acquainted with any books or manuscripts which mention the name of Issa.
Question 6. M. Nicolas Notovitch, a Russian gentleman who visited |672 your monastery between seven and eight years ago, states that you discussed with him the religions of the ancient Egyptians, Assyrians, and the people of Israel.
Answer 6. I know nothing whatever about the Egyptians, Assyrians, and the people of Israel, and do not know anything of their religions whatsoever. I have never mentioned these peoples to any sahib.
[I was reading M. Notovitch's book to the Lama at the time, and he burst out with, 'Sun, sun, sun, manna mi dug!' which is Tibetan for, 'Lies, lies, lies, nothing but lies!' I have read this to him as part of the statement which he is to sign----as his deliberate opinion of M. Notovitch's book. He appears perfectly satisfied on the matter. J. A. D.]
Question 7. Do you know of any Buddhist writings in the Pâli language?
Answer 7. I know of no Buddhist writings in the Pâli langage; all the writings here, that I know of, have been translated from Sanskrit and Hindi into the Tibetan language.
[From this answer, and other observations of the Lama, it would appear that he is not acquainted with the term 'Pâli.'----J. A. D. ]
Question 8. Have you received from any sahib a present of a watch, an alarum, and a thermometer?
Answer 8. I have never received any such presents from any sahib. I do not know what a thermometer is. I am sure that I have not one in my possession.
[This answer was given after a careful explanation of the nature of the articles in question.----J. A. D.]
Question 9. Do you speak Urdu or English?
Answer 9. I do not know either Urdu or English.
Question 10. Is the name of Issa held in great respect by the Buddhists?
Answer 10. They know nothing even of his name; none of the Lamas has ever heard it, save through missionaries and European sources.
Signed in the Tibetan language by the Chief Lama of Himis, and sealed with his official seal.
In the presence of us
J. Archibald Douglas, Professor, Government College, Agra, N.-W. P.
Shahmwell Joldan, late Postmaster of Ladakh.
Himis Monastery, Little Tibet: June 3, 1895.
(Mr. Joldan's Declaration)
This is my declaration: That I acted as interpreter for Professor Douglas in his interviews with the Chief Lama of Hiinis Monastery.
I can speak English, and Tibetan is my native language. The questions and answers to which the Chief Lama has appended his seal and signature were thoroughly understood by him, and I have the fullest confidence in his absolute veracity.
Shahmwell Joldan
(Retired Postmaster of Ladakh
under the British Imperial Post Office).
Leh: June 5, 1895.
This statement and declaration appear conclusive, and they are confirmed by my own inquiries, and by those made in my presence by the Abbot of Hirnis of some of the monks who have been longest resident in the monastery. There is every reason for believing that the conversations with the Lamas of Wokka and Lamayuru originated also in the fertile brain of M. Notovitch.
Neither of these reverend Abbots remembers anything about the Russian traveller, and they know nothing of the religion of Issa (Christianity) or of any Buddhist sacred books or writings which mention his name.
I would here remark that the Lamas of Ladakh are not a garrulous race, and I have never known them indulge in high-flown platitudes on any subject. The casual reader would judge from a perusal of M. Notovitch's 'conversations' with them, that they were as much addicted to pompous generalities as the orators of youthful debating societies. The Lamas I have met are prepared to answer rational inquiries courteously. They do so with brevity, and usually to the point. They confess willingly that their knowledge on religious subjects is limited to their own religion, and that they know nothing whatever of religious systems unconnected with Tibetan Buddhism. They do not read any languages but Sanskrit and Tibetan, and their conversations with foreigners are altogether limited to commonplace topics. The Chief Lama of Himis had never heard of the existence of the Egyptians or of the Assyrians, and his indignation at M. Notovitch's statement that he had discussed their religious beliefs was so real, that he almost seemed to imagine that M. Notovitch had accused him of saying something outrageously improper.
The exclusiveness of the Buddhism of Lassa seems to have instilled into the minds of the Lamaïstes an instinctive shrinking from foreign customs and ideas.
I would call attention especially to the ninth answer in the Lama's statement, in which he disclaims all knowledge of the English and Urdu languages.
The question arises, 'Who was M. Notovitch's interpreter?' The Tibetans of Ladakh competent to interpret such a conversation are leading men, certainly not more than three or four in number. Not one of them has ever seen M. Notovitch, to his knowledge. What does our imaginative author tell about this detail? On page |673 35 of the English edition, we are informed that at the village of Groond (thirty-six miles from Srinagar) he took a shikari into his service 'who fulfilled the rôle of interpreter.' Of all the extraordinary statements with which this book abounds, this appears to us the most marvellous. A Kashmiri shikari is invariably a simple peasant, whose knowledge of language is limited to his native tongue, and a few words of Urdu and English, relating to the necessities of the road, the camp and sport, picked up from English sportscaen and their Hindu attendants.
Even in his own language no Kashmiri villager would be likely to be able to express religious and philosophical ideas such as are contained in the 'conversations' between M. Notovitch and the Lamas. These ideas are foreign to the Kashmiri mode of thought, usually limited to what our author would term 'things palpable.'
We will take one or two examples:
Part of the spirituality of our Lord (p. 33);
Essential principles of monotheism (p. 51);
An intermediary between earth and heaven (p. 51);
used in the 'conversation' with the Abbot of Wokka on the journey to Leh. The conversations at Himis abound in even more magnificent expressions:
Idols which they regarded as neutral to their surroundings (p. 114);
The attenuation of the divine principle (p. 115);
The dominion of things palpable (p. 115);
A canonical part of Buddhism (p. 1:34);
and many others which readers will have no difficulty in finding.
Few things have amused me more, in connexion with this inquiry, than the half-annoyed, half-amused expression of the venerable Lama's face when Mr. Joldan, after a careful explanation from me, did his best to translate into Tibetan, as elegantly as it deserves, the expression 'the attenuation of the divine principle.'
Apart, then, altogether from the statement made by the old Abbot, there are ample reasons for doubting the veracity of M. Notovitch's narrative.
In my last conversation with the Lama we talked of the story of the broken leg. He assured me that no European gentleman had ever been nursed in the monastery while suffering from a broken limb, and then went on to say that no European traveller had ever during his term of office remained at Himis for more than three days. The Abbot called in several old monks to confirm this statement, and mentioned that the hospitality offered by the monastery to travellers is for one night, and is only extended for special reasons by his personal invitation, and that he and his monks would not have forgotten so unusual a circumstance.
That M. Notovitch may have injured his leg after leaving Leh on |674 the road to Srinagar is possible, but the whole story of the broken leg, in so far as it relates to Himis Monastery, is neither more nor less than a fiction.
The Lamaïstes of Ladakh are divided into two great parties: the red monks, or orthodox conservative body; and the yellow monks, a reforming nonconformist sect.
On p. 119 of the Unknown Life of Christ, the Lama of Himis, the Chief Superior under the Dalai Lama of the red or orthodox monks of Ladakh, describes himself and his fellow-monks as 'we yellow monks,' in one of those wonderful conversations before alluded to. It would be just as natural for his Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury, discussing the state of the English Church with an unsophisticated foreigner, to describe himself and the whole bench of bishops as 'we ministers of the Wesleyan Methodist body.' The Russian traveller might have remembered the dark-red robes and the red wallets of the monks who fill the monastery of Himis, unless it be that the Russian author is colour-blind, as well as blind to a sense of truth. The religious differences of these two religious bodies are described with an inaccuracy so marvellous that it might almost seem to be intentional.
Regarded, then, in the light of a work of the imagination, M. Notovitch's book fails to please, because it does not present that most fascinating feature of fiction, a close semblance of probability.
And yet, if I am rightly informed, the French version has gone through eleven editions; so M. Notovitch's effort of imagination has found, doubtless, a substantial reward. In face of the evidence adduced, we must reject the theory generously put forward by Professor Max Müller, that M. Notovitch was the victim of a cunning 'hoax ' on the part of the Buddhist monks of Himis.
I do not believe that the venerable monk who presides over Himis Monastery would have consented to the practice of such a deception, and I do not think that any of the monks are capable of carrying out such a deception successfully. The departures from truth, on other points, which can be proved against M. Notovitch render such a solution highly improbable.
The preface which is attached to the English edition under the form of a letter 'To the Publishers' is a bold defence of the truth of M. Notovitch's story, but it does not contain a single additional argument in favour of the authenticity of the Life of Issa.
A work of brilliant imagination is entitled to respect when it confesses itself as such, but when it is boldly and solemnly asserted again and again to be truth and fact, it is rightly designated by a harsher term. The Life of Issa is not a simple biography. Such a publication, though a literary forgery, might be considered comparatively harmless. This Life of Issa contains two very striking departures from Christian revelation, as accepted by the vast majority of those |675 who confess the faith of Christ. It practically denies the working of miracles, and it also gives a definite denial to the resurrection of Jesus. To the first of these denials is given no less authority than the word's of our Lord, while the second more important article of faith is explained away very much to the discredit of the Apostles of the Early Church. M. Notovitch must remain, therefore, under the burden of what will be in the eyes of many people a more serious charge than literary forgery, and persistent untruthfulness. He has attempted wilfully to pervert Christian truth, and has endeavoured to invest that perversion with a shield of Divine authority.
I am not a religious teacher, and, great as is my respect for Christian missionaries, I cannot profess any enthusiastic sympathy with their methods and immediate aims. M. Notovitch cannot therefore charge me with 'missionary prejudice' or 'obstinate sectarianism.'
But, in the name of common honesty, what must be said of M. Notovitch's statement, that his version of the Life of Issa 'has many more chances of being conformable to the truth than the accounts of the evangelists, the composition of which, effected at different epochs, and at a time ulterior to the events, may have contributed in a large measure to distort the facts and to alter their sense.'
Another daring departure from the New Testament account is that the blame of Christ's crucifixion is cast on the Roman governor Pilate, who is represented as descending to the suborning of false witnesses to excuse the unjust condemnation of Jesus.
The Jewish chief priests and people are represented as deeply attached to the great Preacher, whom they regarded as a possible deliverer from Roman tyranny, and as endeavouring to save Him from the tyrannical injustice of Pilate. This remarkable perversion of the received account has led several people to ask if the author of the Unknown Life of Christ is of Jewish extraction. Such inquiries as I have been able to make are not, however, in favour of such a supposition.
In many respects it may be said that this 'Gospel according to M. Notovitch' bears a resemblance to the Vie de Jésus by Renan, to whom the Russian author states that he showed his manuscripts.
We believe, nevertheless, that the great French author possessed too much perspicacity to be deceived by the 'discovery,' and too much honesty to accept support of his views from such a dubious quarter.
The general question as to the probability of the existence of any Life of Issa among the Buddhist manuscripts in the monasteries of Tibet has been already so ably dealt with by so great an authority on these matters as Professor Max Müller, that I feel it would be presumptuous on my part to attempt to deal with a subject in which |676 I am but slightly versed. I will therefore content myself by saying that the statements of the Lama of Himis, and conversations with other Lamas, entirely bear out Professor Max Müller's contention that no such Life of Issa exists in Thibet.
In conclusion, I would refer to two items of the Russian author's defence of his work. The first is that in which he boldly invites his detractors to visit Himis, and there ascertain the truth or falsehood of his story; the second that passage in which he requests his critics 'to restrict themselves to this simple question: Did those passages exist in the monastery of Himis, and have I faithfully reproduced their substance?'
Otherwise he informs the world in general no one has any 'honest' right to criticise his discovery. I have visited Himis, and have endeavoured by patient and impartial inquiry to find out the truth respecting M. Notovitch's remarkable story, with the result that, while I have not found one single fact to support his statements, all the weight of evidence goes to disprove them beyond all shadow of doubt. It is certain that no such passages as M. Notovitch pretends to have translated exist in the monastery of Himis, and therefore it is impossible that he could have 'faithfully reproduced' the same.
The general accuracy of my statements respecting my interviews with the Lama of Himis can further be borne out by reference to Captain Chevenix Trench, British Commissioner of Ladakh,2 who is due to visit Himis about the end of the present month, and who has expressed to me his intention of discussing the subject with the Chief Lama.
Before concluding, I desire to acknowledge my sense of obligation to the Wazir of Leh, to the Chief Lama and monks of Himis Monastery, to my excellent interpreter, and to other kind friends in Ladakh, not only for the able assistance which they afforded to me in my investigations, but also for the unfailing courtesy and kind hospitality which rendered so enjoyable my visit to Ladakh.
J. Archibald Douglas.
June 1893.
POSTSCRIPT
BY PROFESSOR MAX MÜLLER
Although I was convinced that the story told by M. Notovitch in this Vie inconnue de Jésus-Christ 3 was pure fiction, I thought it |677 fair, when writing my article in the October number of this Review, 1894, to give him the benefit of a doubt, and to suggest that he might possib]y have been hoaxed by Buddhist priests from whom he professed to have gathered his information about Issa, i.e. Jesus. (Isa is the name for Jesus used by Mohammedans.) Such things have happened before. Inquisitive travellers have been supplied with the exact information which they wanted by Mahàtmas and other religious authorities, whether in Tibet or India, or even among Zulus and Red Indians. It seemed a long cry to Leh in Ladakh, and in throwing out in an English review this hint that M. Notovitch might have been hoaxed, I did not think that the Buddhist priests in the Monastery of Himis, in Little Tibet, might be offended by my remarks. After having read, however, the foregoing article by Professor Douglas, I feel bound most humbly to apologise to the excellent Lamas of that monastery for having thought them capable of such frivolity. After the conrplete refutation, or, I should rather say, annihilation, of M. Notovitch by Professor A. Douglas, there does not seem to be any further necessity----nay, any excuse----for trying to spare the feelings of that venturesome Russian traveller. He was not hoaxed, but he tried to hoax us. Mr. Douglas has sent me the original papers, containing the depositions of the Chief Priest of the Monastery of Him is and of his interpreter, and I gladly testify that they entirely agree with the extracts given in the article, and are-signed and sealed by the Chief Lama and by Mr. Joldan, formerly Postmaster of Ladakh, who acted as interpreter between the priests and Professor A. Douglas. The papers are dated Himis Monastery, Little Tibet, June 3, 1894.
I ought perhaps to add that I cannot claim any particular merit in having proved the Vie inconnue de Jésus-Christ----that is, the Life of Christ taken from MSS. in the monasteries of Tibet----to be a mere fiction. I doubt whether any Sanskrit or Pâli scholar, in fact any serious student of Buddhism, was taken in by M. Notovitch. One might as well look for the waters of Jordan in the Brahmaputra as. for a Life of Christ in Tibet.
F. Max Müller.
November 15, 1895.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. 1 Nicolas Notovitch, La Vie inconnue de Jésus-Christ. (Paris, 1894)
2. 1 This paper was written at Himis in June 1895.----J. A D.
3. 2 Paris: P. Ollendorff, 2e éd. 1894.
http://www.tertullian.org/rpearse/scanned/notovitch.htm
Iscriviti a:
Post (Atom)
