LECTURE SIX
The
Mission of the Hebrews. Buddha's Teaching concerning the Ennoblement
of Man's inner Nature and Zarathustra's Teaching concerning the Cosmos.
Elijah and John the Baptist.
It will be easier for us to understand details in the Gospel of
St. Luke if during our preparatory study the beings and
individualities concerned stand before our mind's eye as living
figures. The need for a good deal of preliminary history must
therefore not discourage us.
First and foremost we must learn to know the great central Figure of
the Gospels in the whole complexity of His nature, and also certain
other facts essential to any real understanding of the Gospel of St.
Luke.
Let us first recall what has already been said about the Bodhisattva
who in the fifth/sixth century before our era became Buddha. We have
described what this most significant event meant for humanity and we
will consider it in detail once again.
The content of Buddha's teaching had at some given time to be
transmitted to men as their own possession. In none of the epochs
before Buddha could there have existed on the Earth a human being
capable of discovering within himself the teaching of compassion and
love as expressed in the Eightfold Path. Evolution had not
progressed sufficiently to enable any human being to discover these
truths through his own contemplation and deepened life of feeling.
Everything in the world comes into being and develops; for everything
in existence there must be a cause. How, for example, could men in
earlier times have obeyed the principles subsequently expressed in
the Eightfold Path? They could have done so only because these
principles were handed down as tradition, were inculcated into them
from the occult schools of the initiates and
seers. It was the Bodhisattva who taught in the secret
Mystery-schools, where it was possible to rise to the higher worlds
and receive from those realms knowledge that could not yet be
imparted directly to the human intellect. In ancient times this
teaching had had to be instilled into humanity by those who were
fortunate enough to come into direct contact with the teachers in the
Mystery-schools. It was necessary for men to be influenced in such a
way that their lives were governed by these principles, although they
would not themselves have been capable of discovering them.
Thus men who lived outside the Mysteries unconsciously obeyed the
principles received from those who had access to them. As yet there
existed on the Earth no human body constituted in a way that would
have enabled a man to discover the content of the Eightfold Path
himself, however deeply the spirit may have penetrated into him. The
principles had to be revealed from above and then communicated in a
suitable form. Consequently a Being such as the Bodhisattva, before
he became Buddha, was never able to use a human body on Earth in the
fullest sense. He could find no body capable of incorporating all the
faculties through which he was to influence men. No such body
existed. What, then, was necessary? How did the Bodhisattva
incarnate? We must now ask this question.
What the Bodhisattva was as a spiritual Being did not fully
incarnate. Clairvoyant observation of a body ensouled by a
Bodhisattva would have revealed that the body enclosed only part of
his nature and that his etheric body towered far above the human
sheath; his connection with the spiritual world was never wholly
relinquished; he lived in a spiritual and in a physical body
simultaneously. The transition from Bodhisattva to Buddha meant that
for the first time there existed a body into which the Bodhisattva
could fully descend and through which his powers could take effect.
Thus he exemplified the ideal human stature which men must strive to
emulate in order that each individual may eventually discover from
within himself the teaching of the Eightfold Path, as the Bodhisattva
himself discovered it under the Bodhi tree. Were
we to examine the previous incarnations of the Bodhisattva who became
Buddha we should find that part of his being was obliged to remain in
the spiritual world; he could send only part of himself into the
physical body. It was not until the fifth/sixth century
B.C.
that for the first time there existed a human organism into which the
Bodhisattva could descend in the fullest sense, thus exemplifying the
possibility that the principles of the Eightfold Path can be
discovered by humanity itself through the moral tenor of the
soul.
The fact that some men lived with part of their being in the
spiritual world was known to all religions and cognate modes of
thought. It was known that there were Beings destined to work on the
Earth, for whom human embodiment was too restricted to contain the
whole Individuality. In the religious thought of Western Asia this
kind of union of a higher Individuality with a physical body was called
‘being filled with the Holy Spirit’. This is a quite definite,
technical expression. In the language of those regions it would have
been said of a Being such as a Bodhisattva while incarnated on Earth that
he was ‘filled with the Holy Spirit’ — meaning that the
forces and powers possessed by such a Being were not fully contained
within his human organism and that something spiritual must work from
outside. Thus it might with truth be said that the Buddha, in his
previous incarnations, was ‘filled with the Holy Spirit’.
Having grasped this we shall be able to understand what is said at
the beginning of the Gospel of St. Luke. We know that in the etheric
body of the Jesus-child of the Nathan line of the House of David
there was present the hitherto untouched part of the etheric body
that had been withdrawn from humanity at the time of the
‘Fall into sin’.
The etheric substance withheld from Adam had been preserved
and was sent down into this child. This was necessary in order that a
being so young and entirely untouched by any experiences of earthly
evolution might be in existence and assimilate all that he was
destined to assimilate. Would an ordinary human being who had passed
through incarnations since the Lemurian age have been able to receive
the overshadowing power of Buddha's
Nirmanakaya? No indeed! A human body of great perfection had to be
made available, one that could only be produced through part of the
etheric substance of Adam — untouched by all earthly
influences — being united with the etheric body of this
Jesus-child. This etheric substance was imbued with the forces that
had worked upon Earth evolution before the Fall and now, in the
Jesus-child, their power was immeasurably enhanced. This made it
possible for the mysterious influence referred to in the lecture
yesterday to be exercised by the mother of the Nathan Jesus upon the
mother of the Baptist — that is to say upon John himself before
he was born.
It is also essential to understand the nature of the one known as
John the Baptist. We can understand him only when we perceive the
difference between the teaching given by Buddha in India and the
teaching given to the ancient Hebrew people through Moses and his
successors, the Hebrew prophets.
Buddha imparted to mankind what the human soul can find as its own
law and obey in order to purify itself and thus reach the highest
level of morality attainable on Earth. The ‘Law of the Soul’
— Dharma — was proclaimed through Buddha in such a way
that at the highest stage of development attainable by human nature,
man can discover it himself, in his own soul. Buddha was the first to
reveal it. But the evolution of humanity does not by any means
proceed in a straight line. The several streams of culture and
civilization must fertilize each other. The Christ Event was to come
to pass in Asia Minor and this made it necessary that the development
of the people there should remain behind that of the people of India,
in order that men in Asia Minor might receive in greater freshness,
at a later period, what had been imparted to the people of India in a
different form.
Thus a people who developed in a quite different way and remained at
a more backward stage than those living farther to the East, had to
be established in Asia Minor. Whereas the people of the more distant
East were destined by cosmic wisdom to advance to the stage of being
able to behold the Bodhisattva as Buddha, it was necessary for the
people of Asia Minor — especially the Hebrew people — to be
left at a lower, more childlike stage. The same thing had to happen in
the evolution of humanity on a large scale as might be seen on a small
scale in the case of a human being who develops to a certain degree of
maturity by his twentieth year and has acquired definite faculties. But
acquired faculties are apt also to become shackles, hindrances. Such
faculties tend to become fixed at the stage they have actually reached
and to keep the person concerned at that stage. They have a firm hold
upon him and later on, perhaps in his thirtieth year, it is not easy
for him to transcend the stage reached when he was twenty. On the other
hand, a second man who has kept himself longer in a childlike state
and because he has acquired only very few faculties by his twentieth
year is obliged to learn from the other — such a man can more
easily attain the required stage and indeed at the age of thirty may
reach a higher level than the first man who acquired his faculties in
his early years. Anyone who observes life closely will find this to
be the case. Faculties that a man has made his own possession may
become shackles later on; whereas faculties that are not so
intrinsically linked with the soul but have been acquired in a more
external way are less liable to have that effect.
In order that humanity may advance, provision has always to be made
for two streams of civilization, one of which receives into itself
the rudiments of certain faculties and elaborates them, while the
development of the other, adjacent, stream is as it were held back.
The one stream develops certain faculties to a suitable
degree — faculties which are then essentially part of this stream
and of the men belonging to it. Evolution proceeds, and something new
appears; but the first stream would not be capable of rising to a
higher stage through its own powers. Provision has therefore to be
made for another stream to run side by side with it. This second
stream remains in a certain respect undeveloped, having not nearly
reached the level of the first; nevertheless it continues its course
and is eventually able to benefit from the faculties acquired by the
first. Having in the intervening period remained youthful, it is
able, later on, to rise higher. Thus the
one stream has fertilized the other. Spiritual streams must run their
course side by side in this way in the evolution of humanity and
provision must be made accordingly by the spiritual guidance of the
world.
In what way could it be ensured that side by side with the stream
represented by the great Buddha a second stream should run its course
and at a later time receive what Buddha had brought to mankind?
This could only be achieved by withholding from the stream known as
the ancient Hebraic, the possibility of producing human beings
capable of developing Dharma out of their own moral nature, that is
to say, capable of finding the teachings of the Eightfold Path for
themselves. In this stream there could be no Buddha. What Buddha
brought to his spiritual stream in the form of deep inwardness, the
other stream had to receive from outside. As a particularly wise
measure, therefore, and long before the appearance of Buddha, this people
of the Near East was given the ‘Law’, not from within but from
outside, in the Ten Commandments known as the Decalogue. The teaching
imparted to another people as a possession of the inner life was
given to the ancient Hebrew people in the Ten Commandments — a
number of external Laws received from outside and not yet united with
the soul. Hence by reason of their childlike stage of evolution the
ancient Hebrews felt that the Commandments had been given to them
from heaven. The Indian people had been taught to realize that men
evolve Dharma, the Law of the Soul, from their inmost being; the
Hebrew people were trained to obey the Law given them from without.
In this way they formed a wonderful complement to what Zarathustra
had accomplished for his own civilization and for all civilizations
originating from it.
Emphasis has been laid on the fact that Zarathustra directed his gaze
to the outer world. Whereas Buddha gave deeply penetrating teachings
concerning the ennoblement of man's inner nature, from Zarathustra
came sublime teachings relating to the Cosmos, in order that men
should be enlightened about the world out of which they are born.
Buddha's gaze was directed inwards, Zarathustra's to the outer world,
with the aim of understanding it through spiritual insight.
Let us now concern ourselves with what Zarathustra bestowed upon
humanity from the time when he appeared as the proclaimer of Ahura
Mazdao until his life as Nazarathos. The depth and impressiveness of
his teachings about the great spiritual laws and beings of the Cosmos
steadily increased. What he had given to Persian civilization
concerning the Spirit of the Sun amounted to no more than
indications; but then these indications were amplified and elaborated
into the wonderful Chaldean knowledge that is so little understood
to-day — knowledge relating to the Cosmos and the spiritual causes
governing birth and existence.
If we study these cosmological teachings we find that they reveal one
particularly significant characteristic. While teaching the ancient
Persian people about the external spiritual causes of the material
world, Zarathustra spoke of two Powers: Ormuzd and Ahriman or ‘Angra
Manyu,’ who oppose one another throughout the Universe. But what may
be called the element of moral fervour, moral warmth, would not have
been found in this teaching. According to the ancient Persian view, man
is enmeshed in the whole process of cosmic life. The struggle between
Ormuzd and Ahriman is waged in the human soul, and it is because of the
battle between these two Beings that passions rage in man. There was as
yet no knowledge of the inner nature of the soul; all the teaching
related to the Cosmos. By ‘good’ and ‘evil’ were
meant the beneficial or harmful workings which run counter to each
other in the Cosmos and also come to expression in man. Moral
conceptions were not yet included in teaching that was concerned
essentially with the outer world. Man was made acquainted with the
beings governing the material world, with everything that prevails in
the world as a good, or as a sinister influence. He felt himself
enmeshed in these forces but the moral element itself in which the
soul participates was not yet inwardly experienced. When, for
instance, a man was confronted by another of apparently ‘evil’
nature, he felt that
forces from the evil beings of the world were streaming through him,
that the other man was ‘possessed’ by these evil beings and
moreover could not be held to blame for it. Human beings were felt to be
entangled in a system of cosmic existence not yet permeated by moral
qualities. That was the characteristic feature of a teaching
primarily concerned with the outer world — viewed, of course,
with the eyes of spirit.
It was for this reason that the Hebrew teachings formed such a wonderful
complement to the cosmological knowledge of the Persians, for they
introduced the element of morality into revelations given from without,
thus making it possible for the concept of ‘guilt’, of
‘human guilt’ to be imbued with meaning. Before the
introduction of the Hebrew teaching, all that could be said of an evil
man was that he was possessed by evil forces. The proclamation of the
Ten Commandments made it necessary to distinguish between men who obeyed
the Law and others who did not. Thus there arose the concept of human
guilt. How it was introduced into the evolution of humanity can be
grasped if we consider a record proving what a tragic uncertainty
still prevailed as to the exact meaning of guilt. Study the
Book of Job
and you will discern the lack of clarity about the concept of guilt
— the uncertainty as to what attitude a man should adopt when
misfortune befalls him; there you will glimpse the dawning of the
new concept of guilt.
Thus the moral code was given to the ancient Hebrew people as a
revelation from without — like the revelations concerning the
kingdoms of Nature. This could only come about because Zarathustra
had made provision for the continuation of his work, as I explained,
by passing on his etheric body to Moses and his astral body to
Hermes. Moses was thereby endowed with the faculty to perceive, as
Zarathustra had perceived, the forces at work in the external world;
but instead of experiencing neutral forces only, Moses became aware
of the moral power holding sway in the world, the power that can take
the form of commandment. Hence the element of obedience, submission
to the Law, was implicit in the life and
culture of the Hebrew people, whereas the ideal contained in the
stream represented by Buddha was to give direction to man's inner
life in the teachings of the Eightfold Path. But it was necessary
that this Hebrew people should be preserved until the right time
arrived — the time of the advent of the Christ-principle of which we
are about to speak. The Hebrew people had to be ‘screened’ from
Buddha's revelation and kept at a less mature stage of
culture — if we like to call it so. Hence among the ancient
Hebrews there were personalities who could not themselves, as human
beings, be bearers of the full powers of an Individuality whose mission
it was to represent the ‘Law’. A personality such as Buddha
could not have appeared within the Hebrew people. The Law could be
apprehended only through enlightenment from without — through the
fact that Moses bore the etheric body of Zarathustra and was able to
receive something that was not born of his own soul. To give birth to
the Law from their own hearts was beyond the power of the Hebrew
people. But it was essential, as in all other such cases, for the
work of Moses to be carried onward and so bear fruit at the right
time. Hence it was inevitable that there should arise among the
ancient Hebrew people Individualities such as the Prophets and
Seers, one of the most important of whom was Elijah. What is there to
be said about a personality such as his?
Elijah was destined to be one of the ruling figures in the
régime inaugurated by Moses. But the folk-substance of the
Hebrews could produce no human being able to represent the whole
content of the Law of Moses — which could be received only as a
revelation from above. What we described as being necessary in the
ancient Indian epoch, also as the special nature of the Bodhisattva,
had to be repeated again and again in the Hebrew people too: there
had to be Individualities who were not wholly contained in the human
personality; one part of their being was in the earthly personality
and the other in the spiritual world. Elijah was an Individuality of
this nature. Only part of his being was present in his personality on
the physical plane; the Ego-hood of Elijah could not penetrate fully
into his physical body. He must therefore be called a personality
‘filled with the Spirit’. A figure such as Elijah could
not possibly be brought into existence through the normal forces by
which other men are placed in the world. In the normal way the human
being develops in the mother's body in such a way that through
physical processes the Individuality who has been incarnated
previously simply unites with the physical embryo. In the case of an
ordinary man everything takes place as it were straightforwardly,
without any intervention by forces outside the normal. This could not
be so in the case of an Individuality such as Elijah. Other forces
had to intervene, concerned with the part of the Individuality that
reached into the spiritual world. His development was necessarily
attended by influences working upon him from outside. Hence when such
Individualities are incarnated they appear as men who are
‘inspired’, ‘impelled by the Spirit’. They appear
as ecstatic personalities whose utterances far surpass anything that might
issue from their normal intelligence. All the prophets in the Old Testament
are figures of this kind. They are ‘impelled by the Spirit’;
the Ego cannot always
account for its actions. The Spirit lives in the personality and is
sustained from outside. From time to time such personalities withdraw
into solitude; the part of the Ego needed by the personality
withdraws and inspiration comes from the Spirit. In certain ecstatic,
unconscious states such a being is responsive to the inspirations from
above. The man who lived as ‘Elijah’ was an outstanding example
of this. The words uttered by his mouth and the actions performed by
his hands did not proceed only from the part of his being actually
present in his personality; they were manifestations of
divine-spiritual Beings in the background.
When this Individuality was born again he was to unite with the body
of the child born to Zacharias and Elisabeth. We know from the Gospel
itself that John the Baptist is to be regarded as the reborn Elijah.
But in him we have to do with an Individuality who in his earlier
incarnations had not habitually developed or brought fully into
operation all the forces present in the normal course of life. In the
normal course of life the inner power or force of the Ego becomes
active while the physical body of the human being is developing in the
mother's womb. The Elijah-Individuality in earlier times had not descended
deeply enough to be involved in the inner processes operating here.
The Ego had not, as in normal circumstances, been stirred into
activity by its own forces, but from outside. This was now to happen
again. But the Ego was now farther from the spiritual world and
nearer to the Earth, much more closely connected with the Earth than
the Beings who had formerly guided Elijah. The transition leading to
the amalgamation of the Buddha-stream with the Zarathustra-stream was
now to be brought about.
Everything was to be rejuvenated. It was now the Buddha who had to
work from outside — the Being who had linked himself with the
Earth and its affairs and now, in his Nirmanakaya, was united with
the Nathan Jesus. This Being who on the one side was united with the
Earth but on the other withdrawn from it because he was working only
in his Nirmanakaya which had soared to realms ‘beyond’ the
Earth and hovered above the head of the Nathan Jesus — this Being
had now to work from outside and stimulate the Ego-force of John the
Baptist.
Thus it was the Nirmanakaya of Buddha which now stirred the Ego-force
of John into activity, having the same effect as spiritual forces
that had formerly worked upon Elijah. At certain times the being
known as Elijah had been rapt in states of ecstasy; then the God
spoke, filling his Ego with a force which could be communicated to
the outer world. Now again a spiritual force was present — the
Nirmanakaya of Buddha hovering above the head of the Nathan Jesus;
this force worked upon Elisabeth when John was to be born, stimulated
within her the embryo of John in the sixth month of pregnancy, and
wakened the Ego. But being nearer to the Earth this force now worked
as more than an inspiration; it had an actual formative effect upon
the Ego of John. Under the influence of the visit of her who is there
called ‘Mary’, the Ego of John the Baptist awoke into activity.
The Nirmanakaya of Buddha was here working upon the Ego of the former
Elijah — now the Ego of John the Baptist — wakening it and
penetrating right into the physical substance.
[ 1 ]
What may we now expect?
Even as the words of power once spoken by Elijah in the ninth century
before our era were in truth ‘God's words’, and the actions
performed by his hands ‘God's actions’, it was now to be the
same in the case of John the Baptist, inasmuch as what had been present
in Elijah had come to life again. The Nirmanakaya of Buddha worked as an
inspiration into the Ego of John the Baptist. That which manifested
itself to the shepherds and hovered above the head of the Nathan
Jesus extended its power into John the Baptist, whose preaching was
primarily the re-awakened preaching of Buddha. This fact is in the
highest degree noteworthy and cannot fail to make a deep impression
upon us when we recall the sermon at Benares wherein Buddha spoke of
the suffering in life and the release from it through the Eightfold
Path. He often expanded a sermon by saying in effect: ‘Hitherto you
have had the teaching of the Brahmans; they ascribe their origin to
Brahma himself and claim to be superior to other men because of this
noble descent. These Brahmans claim that a man's worth is determined
by his descent, but I say to you: Man's worth is determined by what
he makes of himself, not by what is in him by virtue of his descent.
Judged by the great wisdom of the world, man's worth lies in whatever
he makes of himself as an individual!’ — Buddha aroused the
wrath of the Brahmans because he emphasized the individual quality in
men, saying: ‘Verily it is of no avail to call yourselves Brahmans;
what matters is that each one of you, through his own personal
qualities and efforts should make of himself a purified individual.’
Although not word for word, such was the gist of many of Buddha's
sermons. And he would often expand this teaching by showing how, when
a man understands the world of suffering, he can feel compassion, can
become a comforter and a helper, how he shares the lot of others
because he knows that he is feeling the same suffering and the same
pain.
The Buddha, now in his Nirmanakaya, shed his radiance upon the Nathan
Jesus-child and continued his preaching inasmuch as he let the words
resound from the mouth of John the Baptist. These words were spoken
under the inspiration of the Buddha and it is like a continuation of
his former preaching when, for example, John says: ‘You who set so
much store by your descent from those who in the service of the
spiritual powers are called Children of the Serpent, and plead the
Wisdom of the Serpent, who led you to this? You believe that you
bring forth fruits of repentance when you merely say: We have
Abraham to our father’ ... (now, however, John continues the actual
preaching of Buddha) ... ‘Say not that you have Abraham to your
father, but be good men, whatever your place in the world. A good
man can be raised up from the stones upon which your feet tread.
Verily, God is able of these stones to raise up children unto
Abraham’ ... And then again he says: ‘He that hath two coats,
let him give to him that hath none!’ Men came to him and asked:
‘Master, what shall we do?’ — exactly as the monks once
came to Buddha. All these sayings seem to be like utterances of Buddha
himself, or a continuation of them.
(See Luke III, 7–12).
Knowing that these Beings appear on the physical plane at different
turning-points of time, we learn to understand the unity of
religions and the spiritual proclamations made to mankind. We shall
not realize who and what Buddha was by clinging to tradition but by
listening to how he actually speaks. Five to six hundred years before
our era, Buddha preached the Sermon at Benares, but his voice has not
been silenced. He speaks, although no longer incarnated, when he
inspires through the Nirmanakaya. From the mouth of John the Baptist
we hear what the Buddha had to say six hundred years after he had
lived in a physical body.
There we have a real indication of the ‘unity of religions!’
We must look for each religion at the right point in the evolution of
humanity and seek for what is truly alive in it, not what is
dead — for everything continues to develop. This we must learn to
realize. To refuse to hear Buddha's utterances from the mouth of John
the Baptist is like someone who had seen the seed of a rose-tree and
later on, when the tree has grown and bears flowers, refuses to believe
that the tree grew from the seed, insisting that it is something different!
The truth is that what was once alive in the seed now blossoms in the
rose-tree. And the living essence of the Sermon at Benares blossomed
in the preaching of John the Baptist by the Jordan.
We now know something of another Individuality of whom the Gospel of
St. Luke speaks so impressively. Only by endeavouring to understand
each word as it is really meant can knowledge of the Gospel be acquired.
St. Luke tells us in his introduction that he will recount information
given by ‘seers’. Such persons were able to perceive the
conditions revealing themselves gradually in the course of the ages;
they did not see merely what was happening on the physical plane in
the immediate present. One who saw only that might say: In India,
five or six hundred years before our era, there lived one called the
‘Buddha’, the son of King Suddhodana, and then, later on,
there lived a man known as John the Baptist. Such a person would not,
however, find the thread passing from the one to the other, for that is
perceptible only in the spiritual world. St. Luke says, however, that
his account is based on the evidence of actual ‘seers’. It
is not enough merely to accept the words of these sacred records; we must
learn to understand their true meaning. But for this purpose we must
have clear pictures in our minds of the Individualities in question
and be cognisant of all the elements that streamed into them.
It has already been said that whatever may be the nature and rank of
an Individuality who descends to the Earth, his development must be
in conformity with the faculties available in the body in which he
incarnates, and he must take these faculties and their character into
account. If a Being of very lofty rank wished to descend to the Earth
at the present time, he could not count upon finding bodily
conditions other than those pertaining to a human organism of
to-day. Recognition of who this Individuality actually is, is
possible only in the case of a seer who perceives how the delicate
threads of destiny are woven into his inmost nature. Such a Being, having
attained a higher stage of wisdom, must however bring the body to
maturity through childhood and onwards in such a way that at a
particular point of time what that Being was in earlier incarnations
can become manifest. If a Being is to awaken certain feelings in
mankind the conditions of his earthly incarnation must be such that
his body too is able to endure whatever is the object of his mission.
In the spiritual world things do not present the same appearance as
in the physical world. A Being whose mission it is to proclaim the
possibility of the healing of pain and release from suffering must
himself taste the very depths of suffering in order to find the right
words applicable to it in the human sense.
The Being who subsequently passed into the body of the Nathan Jesus
was the bearer of a message to the whole of mankind. It was a
message intended to lead men out of the narrow ties of
blood-relationship prevailing hitherto. It was not to set aside the
tie between father and son, brother and sister, but to add to the love
inherent in blood-relationship the ‘universal’ love that flows
from soul to soul and transcends all ties of blood. This deepened
love that has nothing to do with kinship of blood was to be brought
by the Being who manifested Himself later on in the body of the
Nathan Jesus. For this purpose it was necessary that the
Individuality who had dwelt since his twelfth year in the body of the
Nathan Jesus should himself experience on Earth what it means to feel
no ties, no relationship with others through the blood. Then only
could this Being experience in all its purity the link between man
and man. He had first to feel himself free from all ties of
blood — free even from the possibility of such ties. The
Individuality in the Nathan Jesus was to stand before the world not
only as a ‘homeless’ man (like the Buddha who left his home for
unknown domains) but as one liberated from all family connections and
from everything associated with the tie of blood. He had to
experience all the pain that can be felt when a man must bid farewell
to everything that is near him, and stand alone; he had to speak from
the experience of utter loneliness and the abandonment of all family
ties. Who was this Being?
We know that he was the Being who until about his twelfth year had
lived in the body of the Solomon Jesus, his father and mother having
descended from the Solomon line. His father had died early, so the
boy was orphaned on the father's side. Besides himself there were
brothers and sisters in this family, and he lived with them as long
as he (Zarathustra) was in the body of the Solomon Jesus. In his
twelfth year he left this family, gave up mother, brothers and
sisters, and passed into the body of the Nathan Jesus. Then the
mother of the Nathan Jesus died and, later on, the father too. Thus
when the Zarathustra-Individuality went out to work in the world he
had parted from everything connected with ties of blood. Not only was
he completely orphaned, not only had he given up brothers and
sisters, but as Zarathustra he had to forgo ever founding a family
and having descendants. For he had abandoned not only his father and
mother, his brothers and sisters, but even his own body, and had
passed into another body — that of the Nathan Jesus. This Being
could then prepare the way for One still more sublime, who later on,
in the body of the Nathan Jesus, entered upon His great
mission — the proclamation of Universal Love. And when the mother
and brothers came and the people said to Him: ‘Thy mother and thy
brethren are without and seek for thee’, then, from the depths of His
soul and without danger of being misunderstood or of wronging filial
love, He could utter the words: ‘That they are not!’ ... for
Zarathustra had relinquished even the body that was connected with
this family. Then, pointing to those who were with Him in free
community of soul, He could say: "Whosoever shall do the will of God,
the same is my brother, and my sister, and mother."
(See Mark, III, 35.)
The words of the scriptures are to be taken literally! In order that
One Being might proclaim universal love He had actually to be
incarnated in a form wherein He could experience the abandonment of
everything that could be founded upon ties of blood.
Our feelings go out to this Being as if He were humanly near
us — a Being who, having descended from sublime heights of spirit
underwent human experiences and human suffering. The more spiritual
our conception of Him, the truer it will be, and the more fervently
will our hearts and souls acclaim Him!
Notes:
1.
There is a slight ambiguity in the German text and the reader will
do well to turn to the passage in the this lecture
(p. 119)
where Dr. Steiner speaks again of the mysterious process connected with
the birth of John the Baptist and of the influence of the Nirmanakaya
of Buddha hovering above the Nathan Jesus.
|