The image of Yeshua Ha-Nozri. Comparison with the gospel Jesus Christ

1. Best Artwork Bulgakov.
2. Deep intention of the writer.
3. A complex image of Yeshua Ha-Nozri.
4. The cause of death of the hero.
5. Heartlessness and indifference of people.
6. Agreement between light and darkness.

According to literary critics and M. A. Bulgakov himself, The Master and Margarita is his final work. Dying from a serious illness, the writer said to his wife: “Maybe this is right ... What could I write after the “Master”?” And in fact, this work is so multifaceted that the reader can not immediately figure out which genre it belongs to. This is a fantastic, and adventurous, and satirical, and most of all a philosophical novel.

Experts define the novel as a menippea, where a deep semantic load is hidden under the mask of laughter. In any case, such opposite principles as philosophy and fantasy, tragedy and farce, fantasy and realism are harmoniously reunited in The Master and Margarita. Another feature of the novel is the displacement of spatial, temporal and psychological characteristics. This is the so-called double novel, or a novel within a novel. Before the eyes of the viewer, echoing each other, two seemingly completely different stories pass. The action of the first takes place in modern times in Moscow, and the second takes the reader to ancient Yershalaim. However, Bulgakov went even further: it is hard to believe that these two stories were written by the same author. Moscow incidents are described in living language. There is a lot of comedy, fantasy, devilry. In some places, the author's familiar chatter with the reader develops into outright gossip. The narrative is built on a certain understatement, incompleteness, which generally casts doubt on the veracity of this part of the work. When it comes to the events in Yershalaim, the artistic style changes dramatically. The story sounds stern and solemn, as if it were not a work of art, but chapters from the Gospel: “In the early morning of the fourteenth day of the spring month of Nisan, in a white cloak with a bloody lining, shuffling gait, the procurator of Judea, Pontius Pilate, entered the covered colonnade between the two wings of the palace of Herod the Great. ..". Both parts, according to the writer's intention, should show the reader the state of morality over the past two thousand years.

Yeshua Ha-Nozri came into this world at the beginning of the Christian era, preaching his doctrine of goodness. However, his contemporaries failed to understand and accept this truth. Yeshua was sentenced to the shameful death penalty - crucifixion on a stake. From the point of view of religious figures, the image of this person does not fit into any Christian canons. Moreover, the novel itself was recognized as "the gospel of Satan." However, Bulgakov's character is an image that includes religious, historical, ethical, philosophical, psychological and other features. That is why it is so difficult to analyze. Of course, Bulgakov, as an educated person, knew the Gospel perfectly, but he was not going to write another sample of spiritual literature. His work is deeply artistic. Therefore, the writer deliberately distorts the facts. Yeshua Ha-Nozri is translated as a savior from Nazareth, while Jesus was born in Bethlehem.

Bulgakov's hero is "a man of twenty-seven years old", the Son of God was thirty-three years old. Yeshua has only one disciple Levi Matthew, Jesus has 12 apostles. Judas in The Master and Margarita was killed on the orders of Pontius Pilate, in the Gospel he hanged himself. With such inconsistencies, the author wants to emphasize once again that Yeshua in the work, first of all, is a person who managed to find psychological and moral support in himself and be faithful to her until the end of his life. Paying attention to the appearance of his hero, he shows readers that spiritual beauty is much higher than external attractiveness: “... he was dressed in an old and torn blue chiton. His head was covered with a white bandage with a strap around his forehead, and his hands were tied behind his back. The man had a large bruise under his left eye, and an abrasion with dried blood in the corner of his mouth. This man was not divinely imperturbable. He, like ordinary people, was subject to fear of Mark the Ratslayer or Pontius Pilate: “The one who was brought in looked at the procurator with anxious curiosity.” Yeshua was unaware of his divine origin, acting like an ordinary person.

Despite the fact that in the novel special attention is paid to the human qualities of the protagonist, his divine origin is not forgotten either. At the end of the work, it is Yeshua who personifies the higher power that instructs Woland to reward the master with peace. At the same time, the author did not perceive his character as a prototype of Christ. Yeshua concentrates in himself the image of the moral law, which enters into a tragic confrontation with legal law. The protagonist came into this world with a moral truth - any person is kind. This is the truth of the entire novel. And with the help of it, Bulgakov seeks to once again prove to people that God exists. A special place is occupied in the novel by the relationship between Yeshua and Pontius Pilate. It is to him that the wanderer says: “All power is violence against people ... the time will come when there will be no power of either Caesar or any other power. A person will pass into the realm of truth and justice, where no power will be needed at all. Feeling a grain of truth in the words of his prisoner, Pontius Pilate cannot let him go, fearing that this will harm his career. Under the pressure of circumstances, he signs Yeshua's death warrant and greatly regrets it.

The hero tries to atone for his guilt by trying to convince the priest to release this particular prisoner in honor of the holiday. When his idea fails, he orders the servants to stop the torment of the hanged man and personally orders to kill Judas. The tragedy of the story of Yeshua Ha-Nozri lies in the fact that his teaching was not in demand. People by that time were not ready to accept his truth. The protagonist is even afraid that his words will be misunderstood: "... this confusion will continue for a very long time." Yeshuya, who did not renounce his teachings, is a symbol of humanity and perseverance. His tragedy, but in the modern world, repeats the Master. Yeshua's death is quite predictable. The tragedy of the situation is further emphasized by the author with the help of a thunderstorm, which also completes the storyline. modern history: "Darkness. Coming from the Mediterranean Sea, it covered the city hated by the procurator... An abyss descended from the sky. Yershalaim disappeared - the great city, as if it did not exist in the world ... Darkness devoured everything ... ".

With the death of the protagonist, the whole city plunged into darkness. At the same time, the moral state of the inhabitants inhabiting the city left much to be desired. Yeshua is sentenced to "hanging on a stake", which entails a long painful execution. Among the townspeople there are many who want to admire this torture. Behind the wagon with prisoners, executioners and soldiers “was about two thousand curious people who were not afraid of the hellish heat and wanted to be present at an interesting spectacle. To these curious ... now curious pilgrims have joined. Approximately the same thing happens two thousand years later, when people strive to get to the scandalous performance of Woland in the Variety. From the behavior of modern people, Satan concludes that human nature does not change: “... they are people as people. They love money, but it has always been ... humanity loves money, no matter what it is made of, whether it is leather, paper, bronze or gold ... Well, frivolous ... well, and mercy sometimes knocks on their hearts.

Throughout the novel, the author, on the one hand, draws a clear line between the spheres of influence of Yeshua and Woland, however, on the other hand, the unity of their opposites is clearly traced. However, despite the fact that in many situations Satan appears to be more significant than Yeshua, these rulers of light and darkness are quite equal. This is the key to balance and harmony in this world, since the absence of one would make the presence of the other meaningless.

Peace, which is awarded to the Master, is a kind of agreement between two great forces. Moreover, Yeshua and Woland are driven to this decision by ordinary human love. Thus, Bulgakov considers this wonderful feeling as the highest value.

Most people have read Bulgakov's incredible novel The Master and Margarita. Critics have different opinions about the work. Yes, and the people who read it react ambiguously to the book, at the same time, each person experiences completely contradictory feelings and emotions.

The uniqueness of Bulgakov's novel

Today, readers have the opportunity to watch the film, which was based on the novel "The Master and Margarita", as well as attend a performance in the theater. For quite a long time, critics tried to determine the type of work, to understand what idea it should convey to the reader, but they never succeeded. This is because the book written by Bulgakov combines many genres and various elements. Surprisingly, the novel-myth was not published during the life of the writer, as they were considered mediocre and hopeless. But exactly twenty-six years have passed since the death of the creator of the book, as many became interested in it, and it saw the light in 1966. It is incredible that all this long time Bulgakov's wife kept the manuscript and believed that one day it would become a real bestseller.

Favorite hero

Many people, when reading The Master and Margarita, have their favorite characters. Yeshua Ha-Nozri is considered especially interesting. His writer identifies with Jesus Christ and gives him a particularly sacred appearance. Nevertheless, the plot twists in such a way that Yeshua is completely different from the image of the gospel saint.

Yeshua Ha-Nozri means Jesus in Hebrew. The meaning of the unusual nickname is still unclear. The unique name was not invented by Bulgakov, he only borrowed it from one of the characters in Chevkin's play. The writer wanted him to be considered and be the main character of the novel. In our time, many people think that the main place in the book is occupied directly by the Master and Margarita, as well as dark forces.

The rise of the hero Yeshua

Mikhail Bulgakov spent a lot of time thinking about the image of the hero he so wanted to describe. As a basis, he took some chapters from the Gospel, which passed his own verification and careful processing of the information contained in them. Thus, the writer wanted to make sure that he was right. This is how Yeshua Ha-Nozri arose, whose image many, and Bulgakov himself, compared with the person of Jesus.

In addition to information from the Gospel, the writer drew some plots and details from works of art. Perhaps that is why The Master and Margarita has an indefinite genre, since it is based on fantasy, satire, mysticism, parable, melodrama and much more.

Mikhail Bulgakov, creating the image of Yeshua, primarily relied on his preferences, thoughts about a full-fledged, morally healthy person. He understood that society is filled to the brim with filth, envy and other negative emotions. Therefore, Yeshua is the prototype of a new person who is true to his convictions, fair and honest by nature. In this way, Bulgakov decided to influence society and each individual separately.

Character characteristic

Bulgakov pays great attention to Yeshua Ha-Notsri and specifically emphasizes the significant difference between his beloved hero and Jesus Christ. The similarities between the characters are reflected in some moments. For example, Yeshua was also betrayed by Judas and was crucified on the cross, but otherwise he is a completely different person. He appears as an ordinary drifter who likes to philosophize and may experience a natural fear of physical pain. Jesus, on the other hand, is shrouded in mysticism and depicted as a deity, something holy and inaccessible to an ordinary mortal.

Mikhail Bulgakov tried to create a completely different Yeshua Ha-Nozri. The characterization of the character is quite simple, but extremely interesting. It was a man from Nazareth who called himself a wandering philosopher. The heroes themselves, namely the Master, who was working on his own novel, and Woland, described Yeshua as a prototype of Jesus Christ. Thus, Yeshua Ha-Nozri and Jesus have some similarities, a similar fate. But otherwise they are very different from each other.

Place of Yeshua Ha-Nozri in the novel

The key character in the novel is a symbol of Light and Goodness. He is the exact opposite of Woland, who is considered the lord of Darkness. Yeshua is present in almost all storylines. Bulgakov writes about him at the beginning, he is also mentioned in the main text and at the end of the book. The bottom line is that Ga-Notsri does not act as God. In general, throughout the entire novel Bulgakov never wrote about heaven or hell. All this is relative for the creator of the book, and there is no question of a single God at all.

The ideology taken as a basis is more similar to the Gnostic or Manichaean. In this regard, the parties are clearly divided into good and evil. As they say, there is no third. At the same time, it is clear that representatives of both spheres act in the book. Yeshua Ha-Notsri is on the side of good, Woland is the representative of evil. They are completely equal and have no right to interfere in the existence and activities of each other.

Unpredictable plot

It was noted above that good and evil cannot interfere in each other's affairs. But in the novel you can meet the moment when Yeshua begins to read the book of the Master. He unusually likes the work, and he decides to send Levi Matvey to Woland. Yeshua's request is to free the Master and Margarita from evil and reward them with peace. Yeshua Ha-Notsri, whose image seems to be woven from goodness, decides on an unpredictable act, because the agreement on non-interference in each other's affairs was concluded many years ago. Thus, Good takes risks and opposes active Evil.

Yeshua's abilities

In addition to the fact that Yeshua Ha-Notsri, whose quotes were remembered by almost all people, was an excellent philosopher, he had great power. This is clearly shown in the pages of the novel when the philosopher cured Pilate of a headache. Yes, he had a real gift, but at the same time he was an ordinary person, which Mikhail Bulgakov emphasizes. In the novel "The Master and Margarita" everything was described in a completely different way than in the Bible. This is evidenced by the scene that took place according to the plot: Yeshua looked into the manuscripts of Matthew and was horrified, because almost everything that was indicated there was not true. Some events coincided with reality, but only half. So Bulgakov wanted to convey to people that the Bible is not a standard and, perhaps, half of what is written there is a lie.

In addition, the writer points out that Yeshua died without ever lying, without betraying his principles and beliefs. It was for this that all the people were grateful to him and admired the sacred person. Yeshua became unusual only because he was real, fair and courageous. Bulgakov tries to emphasize all these qualities and convey to people: here he is - the ideal of a real person.

Character execution

After a case was opened against Yeshua, I decided to deal with him without violence. In his report, he wrote that the wandering philosopher posed no danger and was generally considered insane. As a result, Yeshua was sent to Caesarea Stratonov on the Mediterranean Sea. This happened due to the fact that with his speeches the man caused excitement in the crowd, and they simply decided to eliminate him.

Being a prisoner, Yeshua wrote a report to the procurator, in which he expressed his opinion about the actions of the authorities - that it is they who make people prisoners, and without them a person will live in a completely different world, that is, in a place where justice and truth reign. After reading the report, the procurator decided that the execution of Yeshua Ha-Notsri was inevitable. He argued that the man insulted the ruler, and this cannot be justified.

At the same time, Pontius Pilate shouted that the best, fairest and most honest government that can be on earth is the reign of Emperor Tiberius. At this point, Yeshua's case was closed. After that, the execution of the hero took place, the most terrible and difficult - he was crucified on a wooden cross. With the death of Yeshua, everything around begins to plunge into darkness. At the same time, the inhabitants, whom the philosopher considered his friends and believed in them, show themselves from a completely different side. The townspeople come to admire the terrible execution, the picture they see delights some. Thus ends earth path Yeshua Ha-Notsri, whose characteristics allow us to appreciate all his severity.

Instead of an afterword

To form your own opinion about the hero, you must independently read Bulgakov's unique masterpiece. And only after that you can watch a film based on his motives. The time allotted for getting to know the characters of The Master and Margarita, their fate, will not be wasted, but will bring great pleasure.

The Master and Margarita is the last work of Mikhail Bulgakov. So say not only writers, but he himself. Dying from a serious illness, he said to his wife: “Perhaps this is right. What else could I create after the "Master"? Indeed, what else could the writer say? This work is so multifaceted that the reader does not immediately understand what genre it belongs to. An amazing plot, deep philosophy, a bit of satire and charismatic characters - all this has created a unique masterpiece that is read all over the world.

An interesting character in this work is Yeshua Ha-Nozri, who will be discussed in the article. Of course, many readers, captured by the charisma of the dark lord Woland, do not particularly pay attention to such a character as Yeshua. But even if in the novel Woland himself recognized him as his equal, we should certainly not ignore him.

two towers

"The Master and Margarita" is a harmonious intricacies of opposite principles. Science fiction and philosophy, farce and tragedy, good and evil... Spatial, temporal and psychological characteristics, and in the novel itself there is another novel. Before the eyes of readers, two completely different stories that were created by one author echo each other.

The first story takes place in Bulgakov's contemporary Moscow, and the events of the second take place in ancient Yershalaim, where Yeshua Ha-Nozri and Pontius Pilate meet. Reading the novel, it is hard to believe that these two diametrically opposed novellas were created by one person. Events in Moscow are described in a living language, which is not alien to the notes of comedy, gossip, devilry and familiarity. But when it comes to Yershalaim, the artistic style of the work changes dramatically to a strict and solemn one:

In the early morning of the fourteenth day of the spring month of Nisan, in a white cloak with bloody lining, with a shuffling gait, the procurator of Judea, Pontius Pilate, entered the covered colonnade between the two wings of the palace of Herod the Great ...

These two parts should show the reader what state morality is in and how it has changed in the last 2000 years. Proceeding from this intention of the author, we will consider the image of Yeshua Ha-Nozri.

Doctrine

Yeshua arrived in this world at the beginning of the Christian era and preached a simple doctrine of goodness. Only his contemporaries were not yet ready to accept new truths. Yeshua Ha-Nozri was sentenced to death - a shameful crucifixion on a pillar, which was intended for dangerous criminals.

People have always been afraid of what their mind could not comprehend, and for this ignorance an innocent person paid with his life.

Gospel of...

Initially, it was believed that Yeshua Ha-Notsri and Jesus are one and the same person, but the author did not want to say this at all. The image of Yeshua does not correspond to any Christian canon. This character includes many religious, historical, ethical, psychological and philosophical characteristics, but still remains common man.

Bulgakov was educated and knew the gospel well, but he did not have the goal of creating another copy of spiritual literature. The writer deliberately distorts the facts, even the name Yeshua Ha-Nozri in translation means “savior from Nazareth”, and everyone knows that the biblical character was born in Bethlehem.

Inconsistencies

The above was not the only discrepancy. Yeshua Ha-Notsri in the novel "The Master and Margarita" is an original, truly Bulgakovian hero who has nothing in common with the biblical character. So, in the novel, he appears to the reader as a young man of 27 years old, while the Son of God was 33 years old. Yeshua has only one follower, Levi Matthew, Jesus had 12 disciples. In the novel, Judas was killed on the orders of Pontius Pilate, while in the Gospel he committed suicide.

With such inconsistencies, the author tries in every possible way to emphasize that Yeshua Ha-Notsri is, first of all, a person who was able to find psychological and moral support in himself, and he remained true to his convictions to the very end.

Appearance

In the novel The Master and Margarita, Yeshua Ha-Notsri appears before the reader in an ignoble external image: worn-out sandals, an old and torn blue tunic, a white bandage with a strap around his forehead covers his head. His hands are tied behind his back, there is a bruise under his eye, and an abrasion in the corner of his mouth. By this, Bulgakov wanted to show the reader that spiritual beauty is much higher than external attractiveness.

Yeshua was not divinely imperturbable, like all people, he felt fear of Pilate and Mark the Ratslayer. He did not even know about his (possibly divine) origin and acted in the same way as ordinary people.

Divinity is present

In the work, much attention is paid to the human qualities of the hero, but with all this, the author does not forget about his divine origin. At the end of the novel, it is Yeshua who becomes the personification of the power that told Woland to give the Master peace. And at the same time, the author does not want to perceive this character as a prototype of Christ. That is why the characterization of Yeshua Ha-Nozri is so ambiguous: some say that the Son of God was his prototype, others claim that he was a simple man with a good education, and still others believe that he was slightly out of his mind.

moral truth

The hero of the novel came into the world with one moral truth: every person is kind. This position was the truth of the whole novel. Two thousand years ago, a “means of salvation” (that is, repentance for sins) was found that changed the course of all history. But Bulgakov saw salvation in the spiritual feat of man, in his morality and steadfastness.

Bulgakov himself was not a deeply religious person, he did not go to church, and before his death he even refused unction, but he did not welcome atheism either. He believed that new era in the twentieth century is the time of self-salvation and self-government, which once appeared to the world in Jesus. The author believed that such an act could save Russia in the 20th century. It can be said that Bulgakov wanted people to believe in God, but not blindly follow everything that is written in the Gospel.

Even in the novel, he openly states that the gospel is a fabrication. Yeshua evaluates Levi Matthew (he is also an evangelist who is known to everyone) with the following words:

He walks and walks alone with goat parchment and writes incessantly, but once I looked into this parchment and was horrified. Absolutely nothing of what is written there, I did not say. I begged him: burn your parchment for God's sake!

Yeshua himself refutes the authenticity of the gospel testimony. And in this his views are one with Woland:

Someone already, - Woland turns to Berlioz, and you should know that absolutely nothing of what is written in the Gospels actually ever happened.

Yeshua Ha-Nozri and Pontius Pilate

A special place in the novel is occupied by Yeshua's relationship with Pilate. It was to the latter that Yeshua said that all power is violence against people, and one day the time will come when there will be no power left except the kingdom of truth and justice. Pilate felt a grain of truth in the prisoner's words, but still he cannot let him go, fearing for his career. Circumstances pressed on him, and he signed a death sentence for the rootless philosopher, which he greatly regretted.

Later, Pilate tries to atone for his guilt and asks the priest to release this condemned man in honor of the holiday. But his idea was not crowned with success, so he ordered his servants to stop the suffering of the condemned and personally ordered that Judas be killed.

Getting to know each other better

You can fully understand Bulgakov's hero only by paying attention to the dialogue between Yeshua Ha-Nozri and Pontius Pilate. It is from him that you can find out where Yeshua was from, how educated he was and how he relates to others.

Yeshua is just a personified image of the moral and philosophical ideas of mankind. Therefore, it is not surprising that in the novel there is no description of this man, there is only a mention of how he is dressed and that there are bruises and abrasions on his face.

You can also learn from a dialogue with Pontius Pilate that Yeshua is lonely:

There is no one. I am alone in the world.

And, strangely, there is nothing in this statement that could sound like a complaint about loneliness. Yeshua does not need compassion, he does not feel like an orphan or somehow defective. He is self-sufficient, the whole world is before him, and he is open to him. It is a little difficult to understand the integrity of Yeshua, he is equal to himself and the whole world that he has absorbed. He does not hide in the colorful polyphony of roles and masks, he is free from all this.

The strength of Yeshua Ha-Nozri is so enormous that at first it is mistaken for weakness and lack of will. But he is not so simple: Woland feels himself on an equal footing with him. Bulgakov's character is a vivid example of the idea of ​​a god-man.

The wandering philosopher is strong in his unshakable faith in the good, and neither the fear of punishment nor apparent injustice can take away this faith from him. His faith exists in spite of everything. In this hero, the author sees not only a preacher-reformer, but also the embodiment of free spiritual activity.

Education

In the novel, Yeshua Ha-Nozri has developed intuition and intelligence, which allows him to guess the future, and not just possible events in the next few days. Yeshua is able to guess the fate of his teaching, which is already incorrectly expounded by Matthew Levi. This man is so internally free that even realizing that he is facing the death penalty, he considers it his duty to tell the Roman governor about his meager life.

Ha-Notsri sincerely preaches love and tolerance. He does not have those to whom he would give preference. Pilate, Judas and Ratslayer are all interesting and " kind people only crippled by circumstances and time. Conversing with Pilate, he says that there are no evil people in the world.

The main strength of Yeshua is in openness and spontaneity, he is constantly in such a state that at any moment he is ready to meet halfway. He is open to this world, therefore he understands every person with whom fate confronts him:

The trouble is, - continued the unstoppable bound man, - that you are too closed off and have finally lost faith in people.

Openness and isolation in Bulgakov's world are two poles of good and evil. Good always moves towards, and isolation opens the way for evil. For Yeshua, truth is what it really is, overcoming conventions, liberation from etiquette and dogma.

Tragedy

The tragedy of the story of Yeshua Ha-Nozri is that his teaching was not in demand. People were simply not ready to accept his truth. And the hero even fears that his words will be misunderstood, and the confusion will last for a very long time. But Yeshua did not renounce his ideas, he is a symbol of humanity and perseverance.

The Master experiences the tragedy of his character in the modern world. One can even say that Yeshua Ha-Nozri and the Master are somewhat similar. Neither of them abandoned their ideas, and both paid for them with their lives.

The death of Yeshua was predictable, and the author emphasizes its tragedy with the help of a thunderstorm, which ends the storyline and modern history:

Darkness. Coming from the Mediterranean Sea, it covered the city hated by the procurator... An abyss descended from the sky. Yershalaim disappeared - the great city, as if it did not exist in the world ... Darkness devoured everything ...

Moral

With the death of the protagonist, not only Yershalaim plunged into darkness. The morality of its citizens left much to be desired. Many residents watched the torture with interest. They were not afraid of either the hellish heat or the long journey: execution is so interesting. And approximately the same situation occurs 2000 years later, when the people are eager to attend the scandalous performance of Woland.

Looking at how people behave, Satan draws the following conclusions:

They are people like people. They love money, but it has always been ... humanity loves money, no matter what it is made of, whether it is leather, paper, bronze or gold ... Well, frivolous ... well, and mercy sometimes knocks on their hearts.

Yeshua is not a fading, but a forgotten light, on which shadows disappear. He is the embodiment of kindness and love, an ordinary person who, despite all the suffering, still believes in the world and people. Yeshua Ha-Nozri are powerful forces of good in human form, but even they can be influenced.

Throughout the novel, the author draws a clear line between the spheres of influence of Yeshua and Woland, but, on the other hand, it is difficult not to notice the unity of their opposites. Of course, in many situations Woland looks much more significant than Yeshua, but these rulers of light and darkness are equal. And thanks to this equality, there is harmony in the world, because if there were no one, the existence of the other would be meaningless. The peace that the Masters were awarded is a kind of agreement between two powerful forces, and two great forces are driven to this decision by ordinary human love, which is considered in the novel as the highest value.

For over two thousand years, the person of Jesus Christ has stirred the minds and hearts of people. Historians, religious organizations, artists are endlessly debating whether Christ existed or not, if so, who he really was. And these disputes are unlikely to ever subside: after all, Jesus is not just a man. For atheists or not too religious people, it is a symbol of the Christian faith, which determines the worldview of many inhabitants of our planet.

For believers, he is the Savior, the son of God, who should be worshiped.

Historians study the era described in the New Testament to confirm or deny the existence of Jesus. Philosophers, for the same purpose, study the works of their predecessors and put forward their own theories.

The figure of Jesus is no less interesting for people involved in art. The first images of the Savior were an impersonal image of the prophet. However, already in the Renaissance, there was an interest in Jesus Christ as a person. This is evidenced by numerous paintings by classical artists, where he is no longer depicted as God, but as a man.

Nevertheless, this topic began to be revealed most fully only

since the twentieth century, when the attitude towards religion in most people has changed dramatically. And since the middle of the last century, it is possible to expand the boundaries of this issue in connection with the appearance of such works as the rock opera “Jesus Christ Superstar”, the film “The Passion of the Christ”. In numerous literary works, writers began to portray Jesus as they imagine him.

One of these works is the novel “The Master and Margarita”, or rather, that part of it, which is usually called “a novel in a novel”. In the author's depiction, Jesus here is neither God nor the son of God. This is a wandering preacher named Yeshua and nicknamed Ga-Nozri. In the second chapter of the novel, when we meet him for the first time, we see a “man of about twenty-seven”, dressed “in an old and torn blue tunic”. This is clearly a poor, practically impoverished man, but he is in the palace of one of the most powerful people in Judea, his native country, the procurator Pontius Pilate.

What is the poor man doing here? He was brought before the Roman governor for trial as a criminal. However, before us is a man who is clearly incapable of any crime. And not because he is kind and honest - his high moral qualities cannot be immediately revealed - but because Yeshua is weak.

This is not the first trial for the wandering preacher: he has already been sentenced to death by the Holy Sanhedrin. True, this verdict has not yet been approved. For this, he was taken to the procurator. However, Yeshua had already experienced the beatings and humiliation that inevitably accompanied any judicial procedure at that time. This can be seen at a glance: “The man had a large bruise under his left eye, an abrasion with gore in the corner of his mouth,” and “the hands are tied behind his back.” And a simple man named Yeshua, not the supernatural being Jesus, is suffering and afraid that he will be beaten and humiliated again. Otherwise, where does the very “disturbing curiosity” about which the author speaks come from in his eyes? And where does the humility that he shows when they start beating him come from? When Pontius Pilate orders to “teach” the arrested person to respectfully address him, Yeshua immediately says to Ratslayer: “I understand you. Do not hit me".

Thus the person who appears before us does not answer classical ideas about a martyr or a hero: he is not so brave and not so strong. However, the procurator is imbued with sympathy and respect for his defendant, which are usually not worth the weak in the eyes of the strong. Why, then, did Pilate make an exception for Yeshua? Most likely, because the defendant gave completely sincere answers to questions, but did not do this because he was afraid of torture or death. He simply did not know how otherwise, and he had nothing to hide. In addition, he turned out to be a rather educated person, which made him an interesting interlocutor: after all, Pilate, surprised at himself, began to “ask him about something unnecessary at the trial.” That is why the irritation that the procurator experienced at the beginning of the trial quickly grew into surprise and curiosity, and then into sympathy for the wandering preacher. In addition, having experienced humiliation and pain, Yeshua did not want to humiliate himself, asking for mercy and refusing his words, although even Pilate himself prompted him with an answer that could save him. And even for the sake of saving his life, Ga-Nozri did not give up his beliefs.

What were these beliefs? First, Yeshua stated that “there are no evil people in the world.” And he was even ready to prove his words, which seemed absurd to the procurator. He called good even the centurion Ratslayer, who beat him, and even Judas, who committed a betrayal that doomed the philosopher to death. This conviction of his made the hearts of many people soften, including the tax collector Levi Matthew, who renounced wealth and became a chronicler of a wandering preacher. Pilate did not believe this story and called Yeshua a liar, but he himself changed after hearing him - such was the strength of this conviction.

In addition, Jesus stated that "the temple of the old faith will fall." It was for these words that he was sentenced to death, as they undermined the power of the Sanhedrin and the high priest Caifa. It was from these words that he was asked to refuse, but Yeshua did not agree.

Another detail that attracted Pilate's attention was that the arrested man cured him of a headache that even the best healers could not cope with. However, he did not call himself a doctor. In addition, this unusual person said that he knew the truth, and really knew a lot about people, including Pilate himself. After all, he guessed that the procurator was lonely and withdrawn, and Ratslayer was unhappy. Pilate was frightened by this correct guess, like others like it, but he found the courage to admit that the wandering philosopher was right. Indeed, Yeshua understood people very well: even his words “and you would let me go, hegemon” were not a request, to which the defendant did not stoop, but another guess. The preacher perfectly understood the mood of his judge and expressed his thought aloud, as he always did.

So what was Bulgakov's Christ like? Sincere, kind, honest, wise and weak - that is, possessed purely human features: So, it seems that there was nothing divine in the preacher and philosopher at all. In general, this is how it is. However, there is one trait in his character, thanks to which, perhaps, people declared Yeshua a saint. This trait is compassion. It stemmed from his amazing kindness and belief that "there are no evil people in the world."

Indeed, the wandering philosopher, nicknamed Ga-Nozri, did not judge anyone for actions that did not correspond to his own ideas of good, and even for evil caused to himself. Going to execution for his beliefs, Yeshua said that he "does not blame for the fact that his life was taken." Thus, he did no harm to anyone, not only by deed, but even by word: after all, with any reproach, he could do evil, upsetting a person, causing him to suffer.

Mercy is what distinguished this philosopher and preacher from many others like him. After all, it is easy to preach; it is more difficult to follow your own commandments. So, can this trait be mistaken for a weakness? After all, not a weak, but only a strong person can forgive!

No, Yeshua is really weak: he is afraid of torture and death, he cannot resist anyone who tries to harm him. However, there is great strength in his philosophy: it was not for nothing that Kaifa and the entire Sanhedrin were so afraid of her. And it was not in vain that people followed him, Jesus, making true his prediction that “the temple of the old faith would collapse.” Yeshua's mercy came not from the weakness of man, but from the strength of his philosophy.

This is how Bulgakov depicted Jesus Christ in his novel - one of the most famous writers in our country who has ever dealt with this topic. His Yeshua Ha-Nozri is not God, but an ordinary person, and in this the author's interpretation differs from the generally accepted one. Does this mean that this image should not be given attention, that it should not be studied? Rather, on the contrary. Bulgakov portrayed not just a person, he showed him from the best side, the way he should be. We can rightfully call him an ideal, an example to follow. After all, he never harmed anyone - and at the same time defended his beliefs. He was executed - and at the same time he could afford to forgive his tormentors and executioners. And these same tormentors and executioners repented of their crime and became better and purer. This is the main character trait of Bulgakov's hero: the ability to make people better, cleaner and happier with the power of words.

M. A. Bulgakov in the presentation for schoolchildren: The Master and Margarita. – M.: AST, 2005.

Other works on this topic:

1. Yeshua Ha-Notsri is the main character of the novel created by the Master. In the person of this hero, Bulgakov wanted to portray the biblical Jesus Christ. Yeshua, like Jesus, was betrayed by Judas and...
2. Levi Matvey is a secondary character in Bulgakov's The Master and Margarita, a devoted disciple of Yeshua. Once he was a tax collector, but he renounced worldly life and went ...
3. In the works of Russian writers, the problem of power and the responsibility associated with it occupies a special place. After all, literature is for any thinking and talented person a way to express ...
4. At first glance, the role of Woland in the storyline of the novel does not seem very significant. The influence on the events of his retinue is more obvious. It is the actions of Koroviev and Behemoth, ...
5. Mikhail Bulgakov himself calls the thirteenth chapter of the final version of the novel, in which the Master appears for the first time before the reader, “The Appearance of the Hero”. So, the hero of the novel is still the Master? In favor...
6. The name of the main character of this wonderful novel has become a household name. Many researchers of the writer's work tend to believe that Bulgakov gave the image of Margarita many features of his wife, Elena...
7. Koroviev is a very colorful personality depicted in Bulgakov's novel The Master and Margarita. Koroviev, or Fagot, is Woland's assistant. This character has a bright repulsive appearance: a small...
8. Behemoth is one of Woland's henchmen, he appears before the reader in the form of a huge black cat. The hippo in the Bible is seen as an example of the incomprehensibility of divine creation;...
9. Hella is Woland's maid in Bulgakov's The Master and Margarita. She is beautiful, but she is disfigured by an ugly scar on her neck. Looking at it, we understand that ...

3. Yeshua Ha-Nozri and the New Testament (continued). Philosophy Yeshua

During the interrogation, Pilate's interest in the arrested person increases, reaching its peak after the healing of hemicrania. Further conversation, which no longer resembled an interrogation, but more like a friendly conversation, helped Pilate feel that his task was to save Yeshua. And not just to save, but also to bring him closer to himself, that is, not to let him go free, but to subject him “to imprisonment in Caesarea Straton on the Mediterranean Sea, that is, exactly where the residence of the procurator” (p. 445). This decision is the fruit of the imagination of a man who knows no barriers to his whims: Pilate in his mind cleverly substantiated the possibility of taking Yeshua away, but it never occurred to him to unselfishly release Yeshua, as the historical Pilate intended to do with Jesus. There is another character in the New Testament whose act resembles Pilate's desire. This is what Herod Antipas, the tetrarch of Galilee, did to John the Baptist. The fortress of Macheron, in which Herod imprisoned the prophet, was not far from the palace of the ruler in Tiberias, and Herod often talked with John, “for Herod was afraid of John, knowing that he was a righteous and holy man, and took care of him; He did many things in obedience to him, and listened to him with pleasure” (Mark 6:20) – this is how the apostle Mark testifies about the unusual relationship between Herod and John.

But Bulgakov's Pilate failed to become a follower of the gospel Herod, and Judas from Kiriath, "a very kind and inquisitive person" prevented him (p. 446). Judas of Kiriath is as different from his gospel prototype as Yeshua is from Christ. He was not a disciple of Yeshua, they met on the evening of Yeshua's arrest, about which he told Pilate: “... the day before yesterday I met a young man near the temple who called himself Judas from the city of Kiriath. He invited me to his house in the Lower City and treated me…” (p. 446). There was no betrayal of the teacher either: Judas is a secret informant of the Sanhedrin and a provocateur who provoked a conversation about power, which was overheard by the guards. In this he is close to Aloisy Mogarych and personifies in the novel the eternal theme of denunciation out of self-interest (Judas loves money very much).

Dinner at Judas’s is a common household episode in the life of Yeshua, it is not dated for Easter Eve, because the action takes place on Wednesday, which means both in time and outwardly, and, of course, in a mystical sense, it has nothing to do with the Last Supper of Christ general. This dinner is a trap for a political anarchist, whom the Jewish clergy have long sought to arrest, as well as a strong attack against mystical Christianity and the Church: if there was no Last Supper, then, according to the authors of the Apocrypha, the Christian Church is deprived of its main mystical Sacrament and commanded by Christ Communion is an unfounded fiction.

In a conversation about Judas, Pilate for the first time reveals insight that borders on clairvoyance, which “relates” him to the arrested person: “with a devilish fire ... in his eyes” (p. 446), he recreates an atmosphere of special intimacy, conducive to frankness in the house of Judas: “I lit the lamps ... "(p. 446).

In general, the question of how the procurator knows about the role of Judas in the case of the “under investigation from Galilee” is not so simple. Yeshua was brought to Pilate after being interrogated by Kaifa, which is eloquently evidenced by the marks of beatings on his face. From there, both parchments were received, outlining the elements of the crime: incitement to destroy the temple and anti-government statements. Pilate started talking about Judas immediately after he had read the second report. It is natural to assume that the name of the provocateur is indicated in it. However, Judas is in the service of Kaifa secretly, and in the future, the high priest does not recognize his involvement in the arrest of Yeshua. To Pilate's direct question whether Judas of Kiriath is known to him, Caiaphas prefers to remain silent so as not to sin with a lie on Easter Eve. But on the night of the Easter celebration, he still has to lie: after the death of Judas, Kaifa lies to Aphranius that Judas' money has nothing to do with him, and in general no money was paid to anyone that day. He carefully hides the complicity of Judas, which means that the name of the informer cannot appear in the report read by Pilate. The testimony of those people who overheard the conversation of Judas with the “philosopher” and broke into the house immediately after the seditious words was enough to take the freethinker to prison.

But Pilate knows absolutely everything – a truly incredible awareness. In everything that concerns Judas, Pilate is much more perspicacious than Yeshua. The clairvoyant "philosopher" behaves as if he does not suspect at all who the "inquisitive young man" turned out to be, although this would be obvious to anyone in his place. Yeshua shows the innocence of a genius. But is he really that innocent? With unexpected surprise, Yeshua “suddenly” realizes that death awaits him: “Would you let me go, hegemon,” the prisoner unexpectedly asked, and his voice became anxious, “I see that they want to kill me” (p. 448). And this despite the fact that the verdict already passed by the Sanhedrin is, of course, known to him, as well as the fact that Pilate will only have to approve it. Yeshua's naivety is inexplicable from the usual, human point of view, but the master's novel has its own laws. True, the gift of insight does not leave Yeshua: he “has a premonition” that Judas “will have a misfortune” (p. 447), and this premonition does not deceive him. In general, if we consider the interrogation from a realistic standpoint, there are many oddities, and Yeshua's behavior is puzzling. But if we keep in mind that before us is a staging skillfully staged by the devil, then we have to disassemble not the “truth of life”, but the ingenious plausibility of the theater with the inevitable conventionality of the stage action. The performance is designed for the mind to combine the events described by the master with the New Testament, and the new interpretation, due to its clarity, will seem convincing, and for the actors, the main thing is that they are believed. Therefore, a touch of the “wonderful” in the image of Yeshua and an element of innocence in his character are necessary, which seems to be incompatible in one person, but most fully reveals the image in a very short time. All allusions to the New Testament are connected either with the main task - the denial of the Divine nature of Christ, or with an increase in the impression of authenticity.

The last hours of Yeshua's life, as well as his burial, are only a continuation of two lines: the denial of the Divinity of Christ is the more convincing, the finer the game. The master's novel as a literary work (script) and as a performance is conceived in such a way that neither Yeshua, who plays Jesus, nor Woland, who plays Pilate, verbally never refute the Divine Essence of Jesus. The actors simply do not talk about it, offering such an option, in which the very formulation of the question turns out to be inappropriate: it is quite obvious that Yeshua is not the son of God and not the Messiah, and his “biography” does not suggest the opposite.

Yeshua does not walk the Way of the Cross of Jesus to Golgotha ​​and does not carry the Cross. The condemned "ridden in a wagon" (p. 588), and boards were hung around their necks with an inscription in Aramaic and Greek: "Robber and rebel" (p. 588). On Lysa Gora, there are no inscribed tablets above the crosses, and there are no crosses as such: criminals were executed on poles with a crossbar without an upper ledge, as in N. Ge’s painting “The Crucifixion” (1894), although the artist did place the tablets. Such variations of crosses were used in the practice of Roman execution. Yeshua's hands were not nailed, but only tied to the crossbar, which is also a kind of Roman crucifixion, but this "reality", in itself reliable, conflicts with the New Testament.

Christ was nailed to the Cross, and an inscription was placed above His head, “meaning His guilt”: “This is Jesus, the King of the Jews” (Matt. 27:37). According to the testimony of the Apostle John, the inscription also contained a mocking and contemptuous attitude of the Jews towards Him: “Jesus Nazirite, King of the Jews” (John 19:19).

The master also denies the parable of the prudent thief who believed on the cross that Jesus is the Son of God. Neither Dismas nor Gestas harbor anything but hostility towards Yeshua. Crucified on a nearby pillar, Dismas is absolutely sure that Yeshua is no different from him. When the executioner gives Yeshua a sponge filled with water, Dismas exclaims: “Injustice! I am just as much a robber as he is” (p. 597), clearly parodying Yeshua’s words about “the kingdom of truth and justice” and giving the word “robber” a connotation of some superiority: probably, in his opinion, only robbers have the right to water before death . The names of the robbers correspond to the names included in the tradition of the Crucifixion of Christ - Bulgakov could draw them from the apocryphal gospel of Nicodemus, detailed analysis which is contained in the collection "Monuments of ancient Christian writing" (M., 1860). This book says that the notes attributed to Nicodemus were included in the works of church writers, in the sacred chants of the creators of church songs and canons. Thus, the apocryphal gospels are important not only as monuments of Christian antiquity, but also as a guide to explaining the accessories of church worship, folk beliefs, and works of art.

Nicodemus is identified with the secret disciple of Christ mentioned in the New Testament, a Pharisee, a member of the Sanhedrin, who was baptized by the apostles Peter and John (John 3: 1-21; 7: 50-52; 19: 38-42) and took part in the burial Jesus. He testifies in his notes that Jesus was crucified in a crown of thorns on his head, in a lention near his loins. Above the head was placed a plaque indicating His guilt. The thieves Dismas and Gestas were crucified with him (to the right and left, respectively), of which Dismas repented and believed in God on the cross.

In Catholicism, the names of these robbers are also mentioned, but in a different sequence. Anatole France, who wrote the story "Gestas", took as an epigraph to him a quote from Augustin Thierry's "The Atonement of Larmor": ""Gestas," said the Lord, "today you will be with me in paradise." Gestas - in our ancient mysteries - the name of the robber crucified at the right hand of Jesus Christ. The New Testament does not name the crucified thieves, but the parable of the repentant thief is in the Gospel of Luke (23:39-43).

Judging by the fact that Bulgakov placed Dismas to the right of Yeshua, he did not use Catholic sources and not the version of A. Frans, but the testimony of Nicodemus. The motive of repentance is supplanted by the exclamation of Dismas, rejecting any thought of a possible change in his consciousness.

The execution of Yeshua is striking in the absence of the indispensable crowd in such cases, for the execution is not only punishment, but also edification. (The gathering of the people, of course, is mentioned in the New Testament.) The master's novel explains this by saying that "the sun burned the crowd and drove it back to Yershalaim" (p. 590). Behind the chain of legionnaires under the fig tree "established ... the only viewer, but not a member execution, and sat on a rock from the very beginning” (p. 591). This "spectator" was Levi Matthew. So, in addition to two chains of Roman soldiers surrounding Bald Mountain, Levi Matthew as a spectator, Ratslayer, "sternly" looking "first at the pillars with the executed, then at the soldiers in chains" (p. 590), and Aphranius, who "fitted not far from the pillars on a three-legged stool and sat in complacent immobility” (p. 590–591), there are no other witnesses to the execution. This circumstance emphasizes the esoteric nature of the moment.

In contrast to Jesus, who did not lose consciousness on the Cross, Yeshua was mostly in oblivion: “Yeshua was happier than the other two. In the very first hour, fainting spells began to strike him, and then he fell into oblivion, hanging his head in an unwound turban ”(p. 597). He woke up only at the moment when the guard brought him a sponge with water. At the same time, the “high” (p. 440) voice of Yeshua turns into a “hoarse robber” (p. 597), as if the sentence and execution changed the essence of the complacent philosopher. After Dismas' vicious attack, Yeshua, true to his doctrine of "justice", asks the executioner to give Dismas a drink, " trying to make his voice sound sweet and persuasive, and not getting this” (p. 598). The unsuccessful attempt to change the "robber" voice to "affectionate" somehow does not fit with the previous description of Yeshua: as if he is trying to play a certain role on the cross, but his intonation fails him.

The fact that the hanged were given water, the New Testament does not say. They were given a special drink that had a narcotic effect, after which Jesus immediately died. In a conversation with Pilate, Aphranius says that Yeshua refused this drink.

Yeshua was also buried in a peculiar way, contrary to all Jewish customs and evidence of the burial of Jesus Christ. By the will of the authors of the Apocrypha, the burial place of Yeshua turned out to be extremely far from the Holy Sepulcher. Jesus was buried here, on Calvary, where there were rocky caves in which the dead were placed, closing the entrance to the cave with a stone slab. The disciples did not carry the body of the Teacher far, but buried it in an empty coffin (cave), which belonged to a rich follower of the teachings of Jesus, Joseph of Arimathea, who asked Pilate for permission to bury. The participation of Joseph of Arimathea is mentioned by all the evangelists, and we read that the tomb belonged to him in Matthew: and, rolling a large stone against the door of the tomb, he departed” (Matt. 27:59-60).

The body of Yeshua was taken out of the city by the funeral team, taking Levi with them. " Two hours later reached a deserted gorge north of Yershalaim. There, the team, working in shifts, dug a deep hole within an hour and buried all three executed people in it” (p. 742).

In general, the customs of the Jews were to leave the bodies of criminals (in case they did not have relatives) in the valley of Hinnom (Gehenna), which until 622 BC. e. was a place of pagan cults, and then turned into a dump and cursed. One might assume that the body of Yeshua was taken there, but Gehenna is located to south from Jerusalem, and the bodies of Bulgakov's criminals were sent to north. Therefore, Bulgakov does not give any real indications of where the robbers were buried - the topography remains a secret, known only to the participants in the funeral procession and Pontius Pilate. "Desert Gorge" may be associated with the desert and the scapegoat, but even this association does not shed light on the mystery of Yeshua's burial. Only the northern landmark remains.

The chain of denials connected with the birth, life and death of Jesus Christ is closed in Bulgakov's novel: both the birthplace of Yeshua and the place of his last refuge are assigned somewhere to the north of Palestine. Here we recall the aria that breaks into the telephone conversation of the “Moscow part” of the novel: “The rocks are my shelter”, which can be attributed both to the posthumous punishment of Pilate and to the burial of Yeshua. Even if any miracles happened at the grave of the "philosopher", no one could see them: the guards were not left there; the pit was razed to the ground and covered with stones so that it did not stand out against the background of the rocky desert. Levi, if he happened to return here, would hardly have found the teacher's grave, for only Tolmai, who was in charge of the funeral, knew the identification mark.

Tolmai, whom Aphranius mentions three times in a conversation with the procurator, judging by his name, is a Jew. This means that a Jew who was in the service of the Romans led the funeral. There is nothing strange in this fact, but still it is puzzling that a Jew, even in the service of the Romans, grossly violated the Law, which forbids burial on Saturday and even more so on Easter Saturday. After six o'clock in the evening it was strictly forbidden to bury anyone. The disciples of Jesus Christ were in a great hurry and were in time for the right time. Yeshua died during a thunderstorm that began “toward the end of the day” (p. 714), then, after the thunderstorm, the bodies were taken behind Yershalaim. While the grave was being dug, a lot of time passed, so that the funeral coincided with the height of the holiday and with the death of Judas. Of course, a Jew could not neglect Pascha (as, indeed, did Judas, who preferred a meeting with Niza to the holiday) and defile himself with a burial.

The second grossest violation of the Law is that Yeshua was buried not according to Jewish custom, swaddled with a clean shroud, but dressed in a chiton. Both departures from the Law make Yeshua's funeral lawless, blasphemous, and ambiguous.

To the north of Jerusalem were densely populated cities up to Samaria, where many pagans and semi-pagans lived, who formally converted to Judaism, but secretly professed their faith. The northern landmark of the grave of Yeshua, non-traditional funerals, participation in them of the apostate from the faith Tolmay may be evidence of the non-Jewish nature of the burial and deprive it of a certain religious coloring. This is probably a pagan burial, but not a Roman one: the Romans cremated the dead.

Levi's attempt to steal the body from Bald Mountain is also a negative allusion to the New Testament, of which we have already counted quite a few. The fact is that when Christ was resurrected, the guards who were present at the same time informed the Sanhedrin about the Resurrection, and this circumstance plunged the clergy into confusion. It was decided to bribe the guards so that there would be no talk of the Resurrection, and spread the rumor that the body was stolen by the disciples when the hapless guards were sleeping. “They, having taken the money, acted as they were taught; and this word has spread among the Jews to this day” (Matt. 28:15). The master's novel reinforces the belief in an attempted theft, which goes back to the version of bribed guards from the New Testament.

The motive for stealing the body is described in some detail in N. Notovich's book "The Unknown Life of Jesus Christ", which was called the "Tibetan Gospel" and was widely circulated at the beginning of the 20th century. It was published shortly after Notovitch's 1887 voyage up the Indus River in the Himalayas. According to Notovitch, Pilate, who was extremely afraid of Jesus, ordered after the funeral that the body of Christ be secretly dug up and buried in another place. When the disciples found the tomb empty, they believed in the Resurrection. Here, Pilate's burial in an "unknown place" is important for us. The second point that brings the "Tibetan Gospel" closer to Bulgakov's novel is Yeshua's education. According to Notovich, Jesus left his father's house at the age of fourteen and reached India with a caravan of merchants. There He learned different languages, preached to Hindus and Buddhists, and returned to his homeland at the age of 29. With Bulgakov’s Yeshua, the hero of the “Tibetan Gospel” is brought together by age (according to Bulgakov, Yeshua is a man of “twenty-seven years old” (p. 436)), knowledge of many languages ​​​​(there is no such information about Jesus, except for the “Tibetan Gospel”, as well as vagrancy as a way of life. Of course, the Jesus of the New Testament could not deny that He had a house in Nazareth, where numerous relatives live, and He traveled for only three years. Jesus from Notovitch's book has not seen his family since he was fourteen, constantly moving from city to city, from country to country. The "Tibetan Gospel" could well be known to the author of "The Master and Margarita", in any case, one should not deny the possibility of his acquaintance with this book.

Yeshua does not call himself a philosopher, but Pontius Pilate defines him that way and even asks from which Greek books he drew his views. The idea of ​​the Greek primary sources of knowledge of Yeshua the procurator was prompted by the reasoning that all people are good from birth. Yeshua's philosophical concept that "there are no evil people" is opposed to the Jewish knowledge of ontological evil. Old Testament, counting human nature fallen as a result of original sin, insists on a clear distinction between good, which comes from God, and evil, which comes from Satan. Good can only be understood as the measure of things in God, and not a single impulse, not a single action is good if God is not its criterion and it does not agree with the Law.

In contrast, Yeshua insists that there are no evil people from birth, goodness is inherent in a person as a given, and only external circumstances can affect a person, making him “unhappy”, like, for example, Ratslayer, but they do not change the “good” nature can. Talking about Ratsbane, Yeshua says: “Since kind people mutilated him, he became cruel and callous”(p. 444), but even these acquired qualities he does not want to bring under the category of evil. Yeshua denies evil as such, replacing this concept with the word misfortune. A person in this world, in this case, depends only on circumstances that can be unfortunate and introduce such new features as, say, cruelty and callousness into an initially good nature. But they can be "erased" by exhortation, education, preaching: Yeshua believes that a conversation with Ratslayer would help the latter change. Such reasoning is partly reminiscent of one of the provisions of Greek philosophy that evil is the absence of good, and the lack of proper behavior is a misfortune that occurred as a result of a fatal combination of circumstances. The absence of evil as a monotheistic metaphysical principle in this context removes the question of Satan, the bearer of cosmic evil that arose as a result of the free choice of created angels, and of his struggle for the individual human soul. It is not the free choice of man between good (in God) and evil (in Satan) that comes into play, but a game of chance. Yeshua's position is vulnerable: the "good people" who mutilated Ratslayer did not do a good deed at all, and the "unfortunate" Ratslayer seemed to have "forgotten" about his natural kindness. By rejecting the ontological existence of evil, Yeshua undeniably rejects Satan as the bearer of such. His reasoning continues in the dialogue between Woland and Levi on the roof of the Pashkov House. Woland, being evil incarnate, mocks Levi, who, being a direct follower of Yeshua, denies the existence of evil and at the same time knows perfectly well that it exists, and even communicates with Satan. Comparing evil with a shadow falling from an object, Woland asks Levi: "... what would your good do if evil did not exist?" (p. 776). We will talk about what exactly the disciple Yeshua considers good in the chapter dedicated to him, but he understands good in a very peculiar way. From Woland's reasoning it is clear that he considers good to be primary - after all, the "shadow of the sword" cannot arise without the sword itself. But in this case, it is clear that both the “good” Yeshua and Yeshua himself are shadows from Jesus Christ, because Yeshua appeared only because he was “written off” from Jesus and is His copy and – at the same time – negative. The “good” of Yeshua and Levi is a concept that exists outside of God for those who believe only in life circumstances, in their decisive role.

Yeshua preaches goodness as an essential category given initially to all people. But for some reason, extremely unattractive people fall under the definition of “kind” - there are no oppositions to them in the master’s novel. The gloomy fanatic and potential murderer (with the best of intentions!) Levi, the “cruel”, self-centered, closed to people Pilate, the treacherous and cunning Aphranius, the monstrous Ratslayer, the mercenary informer Judas - they all do extremely bad deeds, even if their motives themselves are good. Pilate defends Caesar and the law and stands guard over order; Ratslayer has distinguished himself as a brave warrior and cracks down on robbers and rebels; Judas serves the Sanhedrin and also stands up for order: everyone has good motives, but reprehensible actions.

It must be said that Yeshua’s hopes for the power of upbringing and moralizing were debunked by the example of Judas: a conversation with a “philosopher” did not change the money-loving scammer in the least, Yeshua’s death did not even fall on him and did not overshadow the joyful excitement from the anticipation of a meeting with someone like him , provocateur Niza and from receiving money for a job well done.

Christ can be considered the antagonist of Yeshua in the matter of good and evil. The whole measure of good, according to Him, is only in God. People can be evil and good, and this is determined by their actions: “For everyone who does evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds be convicted, because they are evil, but he who does what is right goes to the light, so that his works were, because they were done in God” (John 3:20-21).

The question of the neighborhood of "truth" with "justice" is of particular interest. If Yeshua is talking about the transition of mankind to the Kingdom of God, the question of state power disappears by itself, and why then talk about the power of Caesar - it is not clear. If we are talking about utopian times, about communism (or anarchism?) as a society in which the need for state power will disappear, this position is downright revolutionary in nature and, naturally, is perceived by the authorities as a call to rebellion. It is not without reason that Bulgakov's Pilate is interested in what exactly Yeshua understands by "truth", for this is a philosophical category, while "justice" is a concept of a social nature. He receives a completely materialistic answer: the truth turns out to be relative, at the moment it is true that the procurator has a headache. Almost like Marx. Yeshua fully explained his position by retelling to the procurator what he said in the house of Judas: “Among other things, I said ... that all power is violence against people and that the time will come when there will be no power of either Caesars or any other power. Man will pass into the realm of truth and justice, where no power will be needed at all” (p. 447). Not a word about the Kingdom of God. This means that the time of anarchy will come on earth. But before that, Yeshua clearly said that the "temple of the old faith" would be replaced by the "new temple of truth", that is, the truth (probably coupled with "justice") would replace faith in God and become a new object of worship. Yeshua is the prophet of the coming utopian communism. He accepts death for his convictions and forgives Pilate. And although his death is not at all voluntary, it is accepted as ideals to which it is common to return to humanity and which have already won in the country in which the master was born, in a country that has not yet reached the ideal of anarchy, but is on the way to it, and therefore has created the most terrible power in its sophisticated deceit.

The innocence and complacency of Yeshua evokes reader sympathy, although his "kingdom of truth" and "goodness" are very doubtful. The reader likes dissidents, the reader is always dissatisfied with the authorities. But Yeshua's preaching is not at all peaceful, it is ideological - this is obvious. The Sanhedrin felt the anti-clerical orientation of the "philosopher's" speeches: after all, although he did not call for the immediate destruction of the temple, he said that sooner or later the old faith would collapse. Caifa told the procurator: “You wanted to let him out so that he would confuse the people, outrage the faith and bring the people under the Roman swords!” (p. 454). Kaifa's fear is understandable. It is clear that Pilate, the opponent of the high priest, would have gladly acted contrary to the wishes of Kaifa, but he also understands how dangerous Yeshua is not only for Judea, but also for Rome. Telling in the bazaar that power is not inevitable, Yeshua is clearly able to hasten the onset of blessed times and become the ideological instigator of a rebellion in the name of the coming communism, or political anarchy, or simply against power - for the sake of the immediate implementation of "justice". It must be said that Kaifa is not in vain afraid of possible turmoil: the only disciple of Yeshua is ready to take revenge with a knife in his hand. As you can see, Yeshua's preaching did not bring peace to his gloomy soul. Levi accused God of injustice, but how did Yeshua see it? This topic was also touched upon by Woland. “Everything will be right…” (p. 797) – he consoled Margarita, who, as if adopting his soothing intonation, in turn exhorted Ivan Bezdomny: “… everything will be so how to"(p. 811). Satan, the woman in hell, the prophet-revolutionary talk about justice without naming the paths to it.

Every person is looking for a way. And the degree of Yeshua's charm is a kind of litmus test of the spiritual state: the less identification with Christ the reader allows himself, compassion for Yeshua, the more convincing is the bold dissident principle. We see a sufferer for humanistic ideals. According to Bulgakov's times, a dangerous move, but in the context of Bulgakov's entire work, it is quite logical. Who approves the advent of the "kingdom of justice"? A wandering philosopher, covertly mocking Dostoevsky's painful question: is truth possible without Christ? Well, of course, Yeshua answers, only in conjunction with justice.

In 1939, Bulgakov wrote the play Batum about Stalin's early years. It was originally called "Shepherd". The young revolutionary seminarian, who fearlessly rejected religion, is similar in his reasoning to Yeshua. But in the play, the character of young Stalin contains not only obvious progressiveness and a prophetic gift, demonic features clearly appear in him, a kind of hybrid of Christ, Satan, a revolutionary, in general, Antichrist is created. Everything that is latent in Yeshua and deciphered only with the help of the Gospels, in Stalin is presented frighteningly clearly. The young Stalin becomes the incarnate Yeshua, having erased the benign make-up, or rather, gradually erasing it. Of course, he is also a prophet.

However, the prophet, philosopher and madman Yeshua is much more than these characteristics. He is in charge of the “light” in the supra-mundane sphere, dual to Woland, i.e., in the spiritual hierarchy, he is endowed with power on a Manichaean scale. But this is the unrighteous lamb, a deceitful copy of Christ, His opponent is the Antichrist. Stalin in "Batum" is the earthly henchman of the Antichrist, the implementer of political ideas. Bulgakov saw in the seminarian who renounced God the features of the coming Antichrist on earth, but he has not yet grown into someone who will be enthusiastically accepted as the Messiah, because the atheism he professes gives rampant only to the cult of personality, but not to Satan. He is limited by personality, he is all “here and now”, although the passage to this “here” is open to Satan precisely thanks to the incarnation of the Antichrist.

Similar externally the impostor-antichrist must come to Christ at the end of time in order to deceive people who have long put the New Testament on the bookshelves visibility the second coming of Christ and be accepted for Him. The teaching of the Holy Fathers of the Church about the Antichrist emphasizes this apparent similarity. But the master’s novel is also built in accordance with this: in the enacted mystery, Yeshua plays the role of Jesus, impersonating Him to a gullible reader (before that, to the audience or “intuitives,” which the master probably turned out to be). In general, the icon, dusty with everyday life, suddenly began to sparkle with deceptively bright colors. The evangelists have faded into the background.

In this world, Satan can only act through a person, through his thoughts, feelings, heart. The Antichrist is the incarnation of Satan; he was born by an earthly woman and Satan (according to one of the versions, he took the form of a dog or a jackal) and after physical incarnation acquires exorbitant power over people.

In the master's novel, of course, there is no indication of the "pedigree" of Yeshua (the Syrian father is just a rumor). But in the other world, Yeshua creates opposition to Satan not because they are at war with each other: their spheres are different, their methods of influence are the same, but they are united in confrontation with the Creator. In Bulgakov's interpretation, it seems that Yeshua the Antichrist is not inclined to consider his “department” to be in any way inferior to Woland's “department”. It's just that the Antichrist has not been fully manifested until a certain time, his role is not as clear and readable as the role of Satan, more covert.

It is perfectly clear to the master who Yeshua is: in his life he has seen enough of truth and justice without God. He saw in whose name the “new temple of truth” was being established, he saw gigantic idols competing with those of Yershalaim, set up for the glory of a man who is called to benefit the world, allegedly in the name of “justice”, but in fact, put himself in the place of God betrayed by him. That is why the master does not want the “light” of Antichrist, does not ask for it, does not even seek to talk about Yeshua: Woland himself conveys the “assessment” of Yeshua to the master. Having perfectly understood what the realization of the ideals of the Antichrist means, the master does not intend to worship Yeshua, and therefore did not deserve the “light”, preferring to go into the manifested darkness, to Satan. The seducer in the role of a prophet and philosopher is not as terrible as reality, born thanks to him and nourished by his strength.

Provocation is the main feature of the "satanic" characters in Bulgakov's works. Stalin in "Batum" persuades a classmate to hand over a package of leaflets, which makes him an accomplice to the revolutionary activities of the rebellious seminarian; the provocateur is Rudolphi from The Theatrical Novel, etc. The entire novel The Master and Margarita is built on the effectiveness of provocation: Woland, Judas, Nisa, Aloysius are provocateurs. Yeshua also plays this role. He turns to Pilate with a naive provocative request: “Would you let me go, hegemon” (p. 448). Pontius Pilate (not evangelical, who did not find any fault with Jesus at all, and Bulgakovskiy, who had just encountered a “matter of state importance” - this is how the statement about the abolition of the power of the Roman Caesar in the future) was well aware that such a statement could qualify as an “insult to majesty” or, in any case, as an encroachment on the “divine power" of Caesar. This kind of crime was punishable by hanging on a cross, which the Romans called "a cursed (or unfortunate) tree."

Since all four Gospels assert that Pilate did not find any fault in Jesus Christ, since the question did not concern the Roman authorities in general, then, naturally, no psychological conflicts, confrontations and pangs of conscience could arise in the Gospel Pilate, except for one thing: he could not defend Jesus from the Jewish crowd, which sentenced Him to death. The master's version deliberately takes the reader into areas completely unrelated to the New Testament, associating with Bulgakov's modern society, because the Evangelical Pilate can be accused of something, but not of cowardice: he made every effort to save the condemned, persuading the crowd and forcing the Jews admit your guilt. “Pilate, seeing that nothing helps, but confusion increases, took water and washed his hands before the people, and said: I am innocent of the blood of this Just One; see you. And answering, all the people said: His blood is on us and on our children» (Matthew 27:24-25).

But in the Yershalaim events, the tramp, who admitted his guilt in the presence of witnesses and, according to Roman law, is subject to indisputable execution, asks the procurator to release him. It is not difficult to imagine what would have happened if the procurator had agreed to such an adventure. Either he would have been executed along with Yeshua, or he would have had to flee “incognito” with the philosopher from Yershalaim. But where could Pilate hide from the all-seeing Aphranius? Nevertheless, the request was made, and it made Pilate frightened, because he, the procurator, was not at all going to die because of an unfamiliar, albeit nice, person. Career, power is a reality. And even more so, he was not going to die for political views that he did not share. But Yeshua, before his execution, made it clear to him that he considered him a coward. This became the main fault of the fifth procurator of Judea before Yeshua and could never be imputed to Pilate of Pontius, under whom Jesus Christ was crucified.

From the book of 100 forbidden books: censored history of world literature. Book 1 the author Sowa Don B

New Testament Translator: William Tyndale Year and place of first publication: 1526, Germany Literary form: religious text CONTENTS English Protestant reformer and linguist William Tyndale first translated the Bible into English from Greek and Hebrew

From the book Woland and Margarita author Pozdnyaeva Tatiana

2. Yeshua Ha-Notzri and the New Testament The master's novel begins with an interrogation of Yeshua. "Biographical" data are put into the mouth of the accused, and therefore they are especially reliable for the reader. The first difficulty arises in connection with the nickname Ha-Notsri. The most common way is to count

From the book of the Mysteries of Egypt [Rites, traditions, rituals] by Spence Lewis

From the book Jewish World author Telushkin Joseph

Chapter 71 Yeshu. crucifixion. Pontius Pilate. The New Testament The New Testament testifies that Yeshu was a law-observant Jew with a strong ethical and national sensibilities. Yeshu considered love of neighbor to be a central religious requirement. Although many Christians believe

From the book An Eye for an Eye [Old Testament Ethics] author Wright Christopher

From the book Biblical phraseological units in Russian and European culture author Dubrovina Kira Nikolaevna

From the book "The collapse of idols", or Overcoming temptations author Kantor Vladimir Karlovich

From the book The Underworld. Myths of different nations author

Old Testament Deut. - DeuteronomyJ.Nav. - Book of Joshua Judgment. - The Book of Judges. - First Book of Kings 2 Kings. - Second Book of Kings. - 1st Book of Kings 4 Kings. – The Fourth Book of Kings-Shar. - First Book of Chronicles 2 Chr. - Second Book of Chronicles Esph. -

From the book The Underworld. Myths about afterlife author Petrukhin Vladimir Yakovlevich

New Testament GOSPEL Matt. - From Matthew the holy gospel - From Mark the holy gospel Luke. - From Luke the holy gospel John. - From John the holy gospel of Acts. - ACTS OF THE APOSTLES OF THE APOSTLES – Message

From the book Loud History of the Piano. From Mozart to modern jazz with all the stops by Isakoff Stewart

"Philosophy can only exist where there is freedom." Philosophy in the USSR (1960–1980s) (Vladimir Kantor's conversation with Andrei Kolesnikov and Vitaly Kurennoy) What was philosophy in the USSR in the 1960s–1980s? Where did it really exist - in the "underground", in informal groups,

From the author's book