The Gospel of St. Luke
GA 114
19 September 1909, Basel
Lecture Five
[ 1 ] Every great spiritual stream in the world has its particular mission. These streams are not isolated and are separated only during certain epochs; then they merge and mutually fructify each other. The Event of Palestine is an illustration of one most significant fusion of the spiritual streams in humanity.
We have set ourselves the task of understanding the Event of Palestine with increasing clarity. But conceptions of the world and of life do not, as some people seem to imagine, move through the air as pure abstractions and ultimately unite. They are borne by Beings, by Individualities. When a system of thought comes into existence for the first time it must be presented by an Individuality, and when these spiritual streams unite and fertilize each other, something quite definite must also happen in the Individualities who are the bearers of the world-conceptions in question. [ 2 ] The concrete facts connected with the fusion of Buddhism and Zoroastrianism in the Event of Palestine as described in yesterday's lecture, may have seemed very complicated. But if we were content to speak of the happenings in an abstract way and not in concrete detail, it would only be necessary to show how these two streams united. As anthroposophists, however, it is our task to give accounts of the two Individualities who were the actual bearers of these world-conceptions as well as to call attention to the contents of the teachings. Anthroposophists must always endeavour to get away from abstractions and arrive at concrete realities, so you should not be surprised to find such complicated facts connected with a happening as momentous as the fusion of Buddhism and Zoroastrianism.
[ 3 ] This fusion necessarily entailed slow and gradual preparation. We have heard how Buddhism streamed into and worked in the personality born as the child of Joseph and Mary of the Nathan line of the House of David, as related in the Gospel of St. Luke. Joseph and Mary of the Solomon line of the House of David resided originally in Bethlehem with their child Jesus, as recorded in the Gospel of St. Matthew. This child of the Solomon line bore within him the Individuality who, as Zarathustra, or Zoroaster, had inaugurated the ancient Persian civilization. Thus at the beginning of our era, side by side and represented by actual Individualities, we have the stream of Buddhism on the one hand (as described in the Gospel of St. Luke), and on the other the stream of Zoroastrianism in the Jesus of the Solomon line (as described in the Gospel of St. Matthew). The births of the two boys did not occur at exactly the same time.
[ 4 ] I shall have to say things to-day that are not found in the Gospels; but you will understand the Bible all the better if you learn from investigations of the Akashic Chronicle something about the consequences and effects of facts indicated in the Gospels. It must never be forgotten that the words at the end of the Gospel of St. John hold good for all the Gospels—that the world itself could not contain the books that would have to be written if all the facts were presented. The revelations vouchsafed to humanity through Christianity are not of a kind that could have been written down and presented to the world once and for ever as a complete record. Christ's words are true: ‘I am with you always, until the end of the world!’ He is there not as a dead but as a living Being, and what He has to reveal can always be perceived by those whose spiritual eyes are opened. Christianity is a living stream and its revelations will endure as long as human beings are able to receive them. Thus certain facts will be presented to-day, the consequences of which are indicated in the Gospels, though not the facts themselves. Nevertheless you can put them to the test and you will find them substantiated.
[ 5 ] The births of the two Jesus children were separated by a period of a few months. But Jesus of the Gospel of St. Luke and John the Baptist were both born too late to have been victims of the so-called ‘massacre of the innocents’. Has the thought never struck you that those who read about the Bethlehem massacre must ask themselves: How could there have been a John? But the facts can be substantiated in all respects. The Jesus of St. Matthew's Gospel was taken to Egypt by his parents, and John, supposedly, was born shortly before or about the same time. According to the usual view, John remained in Palestine, but in that case he would certainly have been a victim of Herod's murderous deed. You see how necessary it is to devote serious thought to these things; for if all the children of two years old and younger were actually put to death at that time, John would have been one of them. But this riddle will become intelligible if, in the light of the facts disclosed by the Akashic Chronicle, you realize that the events related in the Gospels of St. Luke and St. Matthew did not take place at the same time. The Nathan Jesus was born after the Bethlehem massacre; so too was John. Although the interval was only a matter of months, it was long enough to make these facts possible.
[ 6 ] You will also learn to understand the Jesus of the Gospel of St. Matthew in the light of the more intimate facts. In this boy was reincarnated the Zarathustra-Individuality, from whom the people of ancient Persia had once received the teaching concerning Ahura Mazdao, the great Sun Being. We know that this Sun Being must be regarded as the soul and spirit of the external, physical sun. Hence Zarathustra was able to say: ‘Behold not only the radiance of the physical sun; behold, too, the mighty Being who sends down His spiritual blessings as the physical sun sends down its beneficient light and warmth!’—Ahura Mazdao, later called the Christ—it was He whom Zarathustra proclaimed to the people of Persia, but not yet as a Being who had sojourned on the Earth. Pointing to the sun, Zarathustra could only say: ‘There is His habitation; He is gradually drawing near and one day He will live in a body on the Earth!’
[ 7 ] The great differences between Zoroastrianism and Buddhism are obvious as long as they were separate; but the differences were resolved through their union and rejuvenation in the events of Palestine.
[ 8 ] Let us once again consider what Buddha gave to the world. Buddha's teaching was presented in the Eightfold Path—this being an enumeration of the qualities needed by the human soul if it is to escape the harsh effects of Karma. In course of time Buddha's teaching must be developed as compassion and love by men individually, through their own feelings and sense of morality. I also told you that when the Bodhisattva became Buddha, this was a crucial turning-point in evolution. Had the full revelation of the Bodhisattva in the body of Gautama Buddha not taken place at that time, it would not have been possible for the souls of all human beings to unfold what we call ‘law-abidingness’—‘Dharma’—which a man can only develop from his own being by expelling the content of his astral nature in order to liberate himself from all harsh effects of Karma. The Buddhist legend indicates this in a wonderful way by saying that Buddha succeeded in ‘turning the Wheel of the Law’. This means that the enlightenment of the Bodhisattva and his ascent to Buddhahood enabled a force to stream through the whole of humanity as the result of which men could now evolve ‘Dharma’ from their own souls and gradually fathom the profundities of the Eightfold Path. This possibility began when Buddha first evolved the teaching upon which the moral sense of men on Earth was actually to be based. Such was the task of the Bodhisattva who became Buddha. We see how individual tasks are allotted to the great Individualities when we find in Buddhism all that man can experience in his own soul as his great ideal. The ideal of the human soul what man is and can become—that is the essence of Buddha's teaching and it sufficed as far as his particular mission was concerned.
[ 9 ] Everything in Buddhism has to do with inwardness, with human nature and its inner development; genuine, original Buddhism contained no ‘cosmology’—although it was introduced later on. The essential mission of the Bodhisattva was to bring to men the teaching of the deep inwardness of their own souls. Thus in certain sermons Buddha avoids any definite reference to the Cosmos. Everything is expressed in such a way that if the human soul allows itself to be influenced by Buddha's teaching, it can become more and more perfect. Man is regarded as a self-contained being apart from the great Universe whence he proceeded. It is because this was connected with the special mission of the Bodhisattva that Buddha's teaching, when truly understood, has such a warming, deepening effect upon the soul; for this reason too the teaching seems to those who concern themselves with it to be permeated with such intensity of feeling and such inner warmth when it appears again, rejuvenated, in the Gospel of St. Luke.
[ 10 ] The task of the Individuality incarnated as Zarathustra in ancient Persia was altogether different—in point of fact exactly the opposite. Zarathustra taught of the God without; he taught men to apprehend the great Cosmos spiritually. Buddha directed man's attention to his own inner nature, saying that as the result of development there gradually appear, out of the previous state of ignorance, the ‘six organs’ of which we have spoken, namely, the five sense-organs and Manas. But everything within man was originally born out of the Cosmos. We should have no eye sensitive to light if the light itself had not brought the eye to birth from out of the organism. Goethe said: ‘The eye was created by the light for the light.’ This is a profound truth. The light formed the eye out of neutral organs once present in the human body. In the same way, all the spiritual forces in the Universe work formatively upon man. Everything within him was organized, to begin with, out of divine-spiritual forces. Hence for every ‘inner’ there is an ‘outer’. The forces that are found within man stream into him from outside. And it was the task of Zarathustra to point to the realities that are outside, in man's environment. Hence, for example, he spoke of the ‘Amshaspands’, the great Genii, of whom he enumerated six—in reality there are twelve, but the other six are hidden. These Amshaspands work from outside as the creators and moulders of the organs of the human being. Zarathustra showed that behind the human sense-organs stand the Creators of man; he pointed to the great Genii, to the powers and forces outside man. Buddha pointed to the forces working within man. Zarathustra also pointed to forces and beings below the Amshaspands, calling them the ‘Izards’ or ‘Izeds’. They too penetrate into man from outside in order to work at the inner organization of his bodily nature. Here again Zarathustra was directing attention to spiritual realities in the Cosmos, to external conditions. And whereas Buddha pointed to the actual thought-substance out of which the thoughts arise from the human soul, Zarathustra pointed to the ‘Ferruers’ or ‘Fravashars’, to the ‘world-creative thoughts’ pervading the Universe and surrounding us everywhere. For the thoughts that arise in man are everywhere in existence in the world outside.
[ 11 ] Thus it was the mission of Zarathustra to inculcate into men an attitude of mind particularly concerned with analysing the phenomena of the external world, to present a view of the Universe to a people whose task was to labour in the outer world. This mission was in keeping with the special characteristics of the ancient Persians and the function of Zarathustra was to promote energy and efficiency in this work, although his methods may have taken a form that would be repellant to modern man. Zarathustra's mission was to engender vigour, efficiency and certainty of aim in outer activity through the knowledge that man has not only shelter and support in his own inner being but rests in the bosom of a divine-spiritual world and can therefore say to himself: ‘Whatever your place in the world may be, you are not alone. You live in a Cosmos permeated by Spirit, among cosmic Gods and spiritual Beings; you are born of the Spirit and rest in the Spirit; with every indrawn breath you inhale divine Spirit; with every exhalation you may make an offering to the great Spirit!’ Because of his special mission, Zarathustra's own Initiation was necessarily different from that of the other great missionaries of humanity.
[ 12 ] Let us consider what the Individuality incarnated in Zarathustra was able to achieve. So lofty was his stage of development that he could make provision in advance for the next (Egyptian) stream of culture. Zarathustra had two pupils: the Individualities who appeared again later on as the Egyptian Hermes and as Moses respectively. When these two Individualities were again incarnated in order to carry forward their work for humanity, the astral body sacrificed by Zarathustra was integrated into the Egyptian Hermes. Hermes bore within him the astral body of Zarathustra which had been transmitted to him in order that all the knowledge of the Universe possessed by Zarathustra might again be made manifest and take effect in the outer world. The etheric body of Zarathustra was transmitted to Moses. And because whatever evolves in Time is connected with the etheric body, when Moses became conscious of the secrets contained in his etheric body, he was able to create the mighty pictures of happenings in Time presented in Genesis. In this way Zarathustra worked on through the power of his Individuality, inaugurating and influencing Egyptian culture and the culture of the ancient Hebrews that issued from it.
[ 13 ] Through his Ego too, such an Individuality is destined to fulfil a great mission. The Ego of Zarathustra incarnated again and again in other personalities, for an Individuality of such advanced development can always consecrate an astral body and strengthen an etheric body for his own use, even when he has relinquished his original bodies to others. Thus six hundred years before our era, Zarathustra was born again in ancient Chaldea as Zarathas or Nazarathos, who became the teacher of the Chaldean Mystery-schools; he was also the teacher of Pythagoras and again acquired profound insight into the phenomena of the outer world.
If we steep ourselves in the wisdom of the Chaldeans with the help, not of Anthropology but of Anthroposophy, an inkling will dawn in us of what Zarathustra, as Zarathas or Nazarathos, taught in the Mystery-schools of ancient Chaldea. [ 14 ] The whole of his teaching, as we have heard, was given with the aim of bringing about concord and harmony in the outer world. His mission also included the art of organizing empires and institutions in keeping with the progress of humanity and with order in the social life. Hence those who were his pupils might rightly be called, not only great ‘Magi’, great ‘Initiates’, but also ‘Kings’, that is to say, men versed in the art of establishing social order in the external world.
[ 15 ] Deep and fervent attachment to the Individuality (not the personality) of Zarathustra prevailed in the Mystery-schools of Chaldea. These Wise Men of the East felt that they were intimately connected with their great leader. They saw in him the ‘Star of Humanity’, for ‘Zoroaster’ (Zarathustra) means ‘Golden Star’, or ‘Star of Splendour’. They saw in him a reflection of the Sun itself. And with their profound wisdom they could not fail to know when their Master was born again in Bethlehem. Led by their ‘Star’, they brought as offerings to him the outer symbols for the most precious gift he had been able to bestow upon men. This most precious gift was knowledge of the outer world, of the mysteries of the Cosmos received into the human astral body in thinking, feeling and willing; hence the pupils of Zarathustra strove to impregnate these soul-forces with the wisdom that can be drawn from the deep foundations of the divine-spiritual world. Symbols for this knowledge—which can be acquired by mastering the secrets of the outer world—were gold, frankincense and myrrh: gold the symbol of thinking, frankincense—the symbol of the piety which pervades man as feeling, and myrrh—the symbol of the power of will. Thus by appearing before their Master when he was born again in Bethlehem the Magi gave evidence of their union with him. The writer of the Gospel of St. Matthew relates what is literally true when he describes how the Wise Men among whom Zarathustra had once worked knew that he had reappeared among men, and how they expressed their connection with him through the three symbols of gold, frankincense and myrrh—the symbols for the precious gift he had bestowed upon them.
[ 16 ] The need now was that Zarathustra, as Jesus of the Solomon line of the House of David, should be able to work with all possible power in order to give again to men, in a rejuvenated form, everything he had already given in earlier times. For this purpose he had to gather together and concentrate all the power he had ever possessed. Hence he could not be born in a body from the priestly line of the House of David but only in one from the kingly line. In this way the Gospel of St. Matthew indicates the connection of the kingly name in ancient Persia with the ancestry of the child in whom Zarathustra was incarnated.
Indications of these happenings are also contained in ancient Books of Wisdom originating in the Near East. Whoever really understands these Books of Wisdom reads them differently from those who are ignorant of the facts and therefore confuse everything. In the Old Testament there are, for instance, two prophecies: one in the apocryphal Books of Enoch pointing more to the Nathan Messiah of the priestly line, and the other in the Psalms referring to the Messiah of the kingly line. Every detail in the scriptures harmonizes with the facts that can be ascertained from the Akashic Chronicle.
It was necessary for Zarathustra to gather together all the forces he had formerly possessed. He had surrendered his astral and etheric bodies to Hermes and Moses respectively, and through them to Egyptian and Hebraic culture. It was necessary for him to re-unite with these forces, as it were to fetch back from Egypt the forces of his etheric body. A profound mystery is here revealed to us: Jesus of the Solomon line of the House of David, the reincarnated Zarathustra, was led to Egypt, for in Egypt were the forces that had streamed from his astral body and his etheric body when the former had been bestowed upon Hermes and the latter upon Moses. Because he had influenced the culture and civilization of Egypt, he had to gather to himself the forces he had once relinquished. Hence the ‘Flight into Egypt’ and its spiritual consequences: the absorption of all the forces he now needed in order to give again to men in full strength and in a rejuvenated form, what he had bestowed upon them in past ages.
[ 17 ] Thus the history of the Jesus whose parents resided originally in Bethlehem is correctly related by St. Matthew. St. Luke relates only that the parents of the Jesus of whom he is writing resided in Nazareth, that they went to Bethlehem to be ‘taxed’ and that Jesus was born during that short period. The parents then returned to Nazareth with the child. In the Gospel of St. Matthew we are told that Jesus was born in Bethlehem and that he had to be taken to Egypt. It was after their return from Egypt that the parents settled in Nazareth, for the child who was the reincarnation of Zarathustra was destined to grow up near the child who represented the other stream—the stream of Buddhism. Thus the two streams were brought together in actual reality.
[ 18 ] The Gospels become especially profound when they are indicating essential facts. The quality in the human being that is connected more with will and power, with the ‘kingly’ nature (speaking in the technical sense), is known by those cognisant of the mysteries of existence to be transmitted by the paternal element in heredity. On the other hand, the inner nature that is connected with wisdom and inner mobility of spirit, is transmitted by the maternal element. With his profound insight into the mysteries of existence, Goethe hints at this in the words:
From my father I have my stature
And life's serious conduct;
From my mother a happy nature
And delight in telling fables.
[ 19 ] You can find this truth substantiated again and again in the world. Stature, the outer form, whatever expresses itself directly in the outer structure, and in ‘life's serious conduct’—this is connected with the character of the Ego and is inherited from the paternal element. For this reason the Solomon Jesus had to inherit power from the father, because it was his mission to transmit to the world the divine forces radiating through the world in Space. This is expressed by the writer of the Gospel of St. Matthew in the most wonderful way. The incarnation of an Individuality was announced from the spiritual world as an event of great significance and it was announced, not to Mary, but to Joseph, the father. Truths of immense profundity lie behind all this; such things must never be regarded as fortuitous. Inner traits and qualities such as are inherited from the mother, were transmitted to the Jesus of the Nathan line. Hence the birth of the Jesus of the Gospel of St. Luke was announced to the mother. Such is the profundity of the facts narrated in the scriptures!—But let us continue.
[ 20 ] The other facts described are also full of significance. A forerunner of Jesus of Nazareth was to arise in John the Baptist. To say more about the Individuality of the Baptist will only be possible as time goes on. But to begin with we will consider the picture presented to us—John as the herald of the Being who was to come in Jesus. John proclaimed this by gathering together and summarizing with infinite power everything contained in the old Law. What the Baptist wished to bring home to men was that there must be observance of what was written in the old Law but had grown old in civilization and had been forgotten; it was mature, but was no longer heeded. Therefore what John required above all was the power possessed by a soul born as a mature—even overmature—soul into the world. He was born of old parents; from the very beginning his astral body was pure and cleansed of all the forces which degrade man, because the aged parents were unaffected by passion and desire. There again, profound wisdom is expressed in the Gospel of St. Luke. For such an Individuality, too, provision is made in the Mother-Lodge of humanity. Where the great Manu guides and directs the processes of evolution in the spiritual realm, from thence the streams are sent whithersoever they are needed. An Ego such as that of John the Baptist was born into a body under the immediate guidance and direction of the great Mother-Lodge of humanity in the central sanctuary of earthly spiritual life. The John-Ego descended from the same holy region (Stätte) as that from which the soul-being of the Jesus-child of the Gospel of St. Luke descended, save that upon Jesus there were chiefly bestowed qualities not yet permeated by an Ego in which egoistic traits had developed: that is to say, a young soul was guided to the place where the reborn Adam was to incarnate.
[ 21 ] It will seem strange to you that a soul without a really developed Ego could be guided from the great Mother-Lodge to a certain place. But the same Ego that was withheld from the Jesus of the Gospel of St. Luke was bestowed upon the body of John the Baptist; thus the soul-being in Jesus of the Gospel of St. Luke and the Ego-being in John the Baptist were inwardly related from the beginning. Now when the human embryo develops in the body of the mother, the Ego unites with the other members of the human organism in the third week, but does not come into operation until the last months before birth and then only gradually. Not until then does the Ego become active as an inner force; in a normal case, when an Ego quickens an embryo, we have to do with an Ego that has come from earlier incarnations. In the case of John, however, the Ego in question was inwardly related to the soul-being of the Nathan Jesus. Hence according to the Gospel of St. Luke, the mother of Jesus went to the mother of John the Baptist when the latter was in the sixth month of her pregnancy, and the embryo that in other cases is quickened by its own Ego was here quickened through the medium of the other embryo. The child in the body of Elisabeth begins to move when the mother bearing the Nathan Jesus-child approaches; and it is the Ego through which the child in the other mother (Elisabeth) is quickened.1There is a slight ambiguity in the German text and the reader will do well to turn to the passage in the next 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. (Luke I, 39–44). Such was the deep connection between the Being who was to bring about the fusion of the two spiritual streams and the other who was to announce His coming!
[ 22 ] Events of great sublimity take place at the beginning of our era. When, as so often happens, people say that truth should be simple, this is due to indolence and a dislike of having to wrestle with many concepts; but the greatest truths can be apprehended only when the spiritual faculties are exerted to their utmost capacity. If considerable efforts are needed to describe a machine, it is surely unreasonable to demand that the greatest truths should also be the simplest! Truth is inevitably complicated, and the most strenuous efforts must be made if it is desired to acquire some understanding of the truths relating to the Events of Palestine. Nobody should lend himself to the objection that the facts are unduly complicated; they are complicated because here we have to do with the greatest of all happenings in the evolution of the Earth.
[ 23 ] Thus we see two Jesus-children growing up. The son of Joseph and Mary of the Nathan line was born of a young mother (in Hebrew the word ‘Alma’ would have been used), for a soul of such a nature must necessarily be born of a very young mother. After their return from Bethlehem this couple continued to live in Nazareth with their son. They had no other children; the mother was to be the mother of this Jesus only. When Joseph and Mary of the Solomon line returned with their son from Egypt, they settled in Nazareth and, as related in the Gospel of St. Mark, had several more children: Simon, Judas, Joseph, James and two sisters. (Mark VI, 3).
The Jesus-child who bore within him the Individuality of Zarathustra unfolded with extraordinary rapidity powers that will inevitably be present when such a mighty Ego is working in a body. The nature of the Individuality in the body of the Nathan Jesus was altogether different, the most important factor there being the Nirmanakaya of Buddha overshadowing this child. Hence when the parents had returned from Bethlehem, the child is said to have been full of wisdom—that is, in his etheric body; he was “filled with wisdom and the grace of God was upon him.” (Luke II, 40). But he grew up in such a way that the ordinary human qualities connected with understanding and knowledge of the external world developed in him exceedingly slowly. A superficial observer would have called this child comparatively backward—if account had been taken only of his intellectual capacities. But instead there developed in him the power streaming from the overshadowing Nirmanakaya of Buddha. He unfolded a depth of inwardness comparable with nothing of the kind in the world, a power of feeling that had an extraordinary effect upon everyone around him. Thus in the Nathan Jesus we see a Being with infinite depths of feeling, and in the Solomon Jesus an Individuality of exceptional maturity, having profound understanding of the world.
[ 24 ] Words of great significance had been spoken to the mother of the Nathan Jesus, the child of deep feeling. When Simeon stood before the newborn child and beheld above him the radiance of the Being he had been unable to see in India as the Buddha, he foretold the momentous events that were now to take place; but he spoke also of the ‘sword that would pierce the mother's heart’. These words too refer to something we shall endeavour to understand.
[ 25 ] The parents were in friendly relationship and the children grew up as near neighbours until they were about twelve years old. When the Nathan Jesus reached this age his parents went to Jerusalem ‘after the custom’, to take part in the Feast of the Passover, and the child went with them, as was usual. We now find in the Gospel of St. Luke the mysterious narrative of the twelve-year-old Jesus in the temple. As the parents were returning from the Feast they suddenly missed the boy; failing to find him among the company of travellers they turned back again and found him in the temple conversing with the learned doctors, all of whom were astonished at his wisdom.
[ 26 ] What had happened? We will enquire of the imperishable Akashic Chronicle.
The facts of existence are by no means simple. What had happened on this occasion may also happen in a different way elsewhere in the world. At a certain stage of development some individuality may need conditions differing from those that were present at the beginning of his life. Hence it repeatedly happens that someone lives to a certain age and then suddenly falls into a state of deathlike unconsciousness. A transformation takes place: his own Ego leaves him and another Ego passes into his bodily constitution. Such a change occurs in other cases too; it is a phenomenon known to every occultist. In the case of the twelve-year-old Jesus, the following happened. The Zarathustra-Ego which had lived hitherto in the body of the Jesus belonging to the kingly or Solomon line of the House of David in order to reach the highest level of his epoch, left that body and passed into the body of the Nathan Jesus who then appeared as one transformed. His parents did not recognize him; nor did they understand his words, for now the Zarathustra-Ego was speaking out of the Nathan Jesus. This was the time when the Nirmanakaya of Buddha united with the cast-off astral sheath and when the Zarathustra-Ego passed into him. This child, now so changed that his parents did not know what to make of him, was taken home with them.
[ 27 ] Not long afterwards the mother of the Nathan Jesus died, so that the child into whom the Zarathustra-Ego had now passed was orphaned on the mother's side. As we shall see, the fact that the mother died and the child was left an orphan is especially significant. Nor could the child of the Solomon line continue to live under ordinary conditions when the Zarathustra-Ego had gone out of him. Joseph of the Solomon line had already died, and the mother of the child who had once been the Solomon Jesus, together with her children James, Joseph, Simon, Judas and the two daughters, were taken into the house of the Nathan Joseph; so that Zarathustra (now in the body of the Nathan Jesus-child) was again living in the family (with the exception of the father) in which he had incarnated. In this way the two families were combined into one, and the mother of the brothers and sisters—as we may call them, for in respect of the Ego they were brothers and sisters—lived in the house of Joseph of the Nathan line with the Jesus whose native town—in the bodily sense—was Nazareth.
[ 28 ] Here we see the actual fusion of Buddhism and Zoroastrianism. For the body now harbouring the mature Ego-soul of Zarathustra had been able to assimilate everything that resulted from the union of the Nirmanakaya of Buddha with the discarded astral sheath. Thus the Individuality now growing up as ‘Jesus of Nazareth’ bore within him the Ego of Zarathustra irradiated and pervaded by the spiritual power of the rejuvenated Nirmanakaya of Buddha. In this sense Buddhism and Zoroastrianism united in the soul of Jesus of Nazareth.
When Joseph of the Nathan line also died, comparatively soon, the Zarathustra-child was in very fact an orphan and felt himself as such; he was not the being he appeared to be according to his bodily descent; in respect of the spirit he was the reborn Zarathustra; in respect of bodily descent the father was Joseph of the Nathan line and the external world could have no other view. [ 29 ] St. Luke relates it and we must take his words exactly:
‘Now when all the people were baptized, it came to pass that Jesus also being baptized, and praying, the heaven was opened and the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him and a voice came from heaven which said, Thou art my beloved Son, this day have I begotten Thee. And Jesus himself, when he began to teach, was about thirty years of age ...’
[ 30 ] and now it is not said simply that he was a ‘son’ of Joseph, but: ‘being as was supposed the son of Joseph’ (Luke III, 21–23)—for the Ego had originally incarnated in the Solomon Jesus and was therefore not connected fundamentally with the Nathan Joseph.
[ 31 ] ‘Jesus of Nazareth’ was now a Being, whose inmost nature comprised all the blessings of Buddhism and Zoroastrianism. A momentous destiny awaited him—a destiny altogether different from that of any others baptized by John in the Jordan. And we shall see that later on, when the Baptism took place, the Christ was received into the inmost nature of this Being. Then, too, the immortal part of the original mother of the Nathan Jesus descended from the spiritual world and transformed the mother who had been taken into the house of the Nathan Joseph, making her again virginal.2The German words are: und machte sie wieder jungfräulich. Thus the soul of the mother whom the Nathan Jesus had lost was restored to him at the time of the Baptism in the Jordan. The mother who had remained to him harboured within her the soul of his original mother, called in the Bible the ‘Blessed Mary’.
Fünfter Vortrag
[ 1 ] Die großen Geistesströmungen der Menschheit, welche ihren Weg durch die Welt nehmen, haben alle ihre besondere Mission. Sie laufen nicht vereinzelt durch die Welt hin, sondern sie gehen nur durch gewisse Epochen hindurch getrennt; dann kreuzen sie sich in der mannigfaltigsten Weise und befruchten sich. Einen solchen großen, gewaltigen Zusammenfluß von Geistesströmungen der Menschheit sehen wir insbesondere in dem Ereignis von Palästina. Wir haben ja die Aufgabe, uns dieses Ereignis mit immer größerer Klarheit vor die Seele zu führen. Aber Weltanschauungen, wie sie ihren Weg nehmen, laufen nicht in der Art, daß sie, wie man es sich etwa abstrakt vorstellen könnte, gleichsam wie durch die Luft gehen und sich wie in einem Punkte vereinigen, sondern Weltanschauungen gehen durch Wesenheiten, durch Individualitäten. Wo eine Weltanschauung zuerst auftritt, muß sie getragen werden durch eine Individualität. Wo Geistesströmungen zusammenfließen und sich gegenseitig befruchten, da muß auch in denen, welche die Träger dieser Weltanschauungen sind, etwas ganz Besonderes vorgehen.
[ 2 ] Es mag mancher in dem gestrigen Vortrage sehr kompliziert gefunden haben, wie die beiden großen Geistesströmungen des Buddhismus und des Zarathustrismus sich im Konkreten in dem Ereignisse von Palästina begegnen. Würden wir nur abstrakt sprechen und nicht konkret auf die Ereignisse losgehen, so brauchten wir nur zu zeigen, wie diese beiden Weltanschauungen sich verbinden. Als Anthroposophen haben wir aber die Aufgabe, sowohl auf jene Individualitäten hinzuweisen, welche die Träger der beiden Weltanschauungen waren, wie auch auf das, was in ihnen vorhanden ist; denn der Anthroposoph soll vom Abstrakten immer mehr ins Konkrete hineinkommen. So darf es Sie nicht wundern, daß da,wo so etwas Großes, Gewaltiges geschehen sollte, auch einegroße äußere Komplikation der’Iatsachen vorhanden war, daß nicht ohne weiteres der Zarathustrismus und der Buddhismus zusammenfließen konnten. Das mußte langsam und allmählich vorbereitet werden.
[ 3 ] So sehen wir, wie der Buddhismus einströmte und wirkte in der Persönlichkeit, welche dem Joseph und der Maria aus der nathanischen Linie des Hauses David geboren wurde als das Kind, das uns durch das Lukas-Evangelium geschildert wird. Auf der anderen Seite haben wir, abstammend aus der salomonischen Linie des davidischen Geschlechtes, jenes Elternpaar Joseph und Maria mit dem Jesuskinde, das ursprünglich in Bethlehem wohnte und das uns der Schreiber des Matthäus-Evangeliums schildert. Dieser Jesusknabe aus der salomonischen Linie ist der Träger jener Individualität, die einst als Zarathustra die urpersische Kultur begründete. So haben wir am Ausgangspunkte unserer Zeitrechnung als tatsächliche Individualitäten nebeneinanderstehend die beiden Strömungen des Buddhismus auf der einen Seite, wie er uns zunächst im Lukas-Evangelium geschildert wird, und des Zarathustrismus auf der anderen Seite, wie er uns in dem Jesus aus der salomonischen Linie des Geschlechtes David durch Matthäus geschildert wird. Die Zeitpunkte der Geburten dieser beiden. Knaben fallen nicht genau zusammen.
[ 4 ] Ich muß natürlich heute etwas sagen, was in den Evangelien nicht steht; aber Sie werden gerade die Evangelien genauer verstehen, wenn Sie etwas aus der Akasha-Chronik erfahren, wovon die Evangelien zwar die Wirkungen und Folgen andeuten, was sie aber nicht selber erzählen konnten. Man muß festhalten, daß für alle Evangelien das gilt, was am Schlusse des Johannes-Evangeliums steht, «daß alle Bücher der Welt nicht ausreichen würden, um alle Tatsachen zu schildern, die zu schildern wären» (Johannes 21,25). Und die Offenbarungen, die durch das Christentum der Menschheit geworden sind, sind ja auch nicht solche, welche einmal abgeschlossen und in Büchern geschrieben sind und damit als Ganzes in Buchform der Welt gegeben worden wären. Wahr ist das Wort «Ich bin bei euch alle Tage bis an der Welt Ende» (Matthäus 28, 20). Nicht als ein Toter, sondern als ein Lebendiger ist der Christus da, und was er uns zu geben hat, das können die, denen die geistigen Augen geöffnet sind, immer wieder von ihm erfahren. Das Christentum ist eine lebendige Geistesströmung, und seine Offenbarungen werden fortdauern, solange die Menschen imstande sind, die Offenbarungen aufzunehmen. So werden heute einige Tatsachen erwähnt werden, die sich in ihren Folgen in den Evangelien finden, die aber so nicht selbst darinnen stehen. Sie können sie aber durchaus an den äußeren Tatsachen prüfen, und Sie werden sie dann bewahrheitet finden.
[ 5 ] Einige Monate voneinander geschieden also lagen die Geburten der beiden Jesusknaben. Aber sowohl der Jesus des Lukas-Evangeliums wie auch der Johannes waren doch um so viel später geboren, daß sie der sogenannte bethlehemitische Kindermord nicht treffen konnte. Denn haben Sie einmal darüber nachgedacht, daß diejenigen, welche von dem bethlehemitischen Kindermord lesen, sich doch fragen müßten: Warum konnten wir denn einen Johannes dann noch haben? — Aber die Tatsachen sind solche, daß Sie sie gegen alles bewahrheitet finden können. Denken Sie sich, daß der Jesus des Matthäus-Evangeliums nach Ägypten geführt wird von seinen Eltern und daß kurz vorher oder zu gleicher Zeit der Johannes geboren wird. Der bleibt nach der gewöhnlichen Anschauung in Palästina, wo ihn doch eigentlich das hätte treffen müssen, was Herodes verhängt hat. Er hätte also eigentlich durch die Mordtat des Herodes sterben müssen und nicht da sein können. Sie sehen, daß man über alle diese Dinge wirklich nachdenken muß. Denn wenn damals wirklich alle Kinder getötet worden sind, die in den ersten zwei Lebensjahren waren, so hätte der Johannes mitgetötet werden müssen. Sie werden es aber erklärlich finden, wenn Sie die Tatsachen der Akasha-Chronik nehmen und sich klar sind, daß die Geschehnisse des Matthäus-Evangeliums und des Lukas-Evangeliums nicht in die gleiche Zeit fallen, so daß die Geburt des nathanischen Jesus nicht mehr in die Zeit des bethlehemitischen Kindermordes fällt. Und ebenso ist es mit dem Johannes. Obwohl nur Monate dazwischen sind, so genügen sie doch, um diese Tatsachen möglich zu machen.
[ 6 ] Ebenso werden Sie aus den intimeren Tatsachen den Jesus des Matthäus-Evangeliums verstehen lernen. In diesem Knaben wird die Individualität wiederverkörpert, die wir als den Zarathustra der urpersischen Kultur kennengelernt haben. Wir wissen von diesem Zarathustra, daß er einst die große Lehre von dem Ahura Mazdao, dem großen Sonnenwesen, seinem persischen Volke gegeben hat. Wir wissen, daß wir uns dieses Sonnenwesen so vorzustellen haben, daß es der geistig-seelische Teil von dem ist, wovon uns die äußere physische Sonne den physischen Teil darstellt. Daher konnte Zarathustra sagen: Sehet nicht nur die physische Sonne strahlen, sondern sehet das gewaltige Wesen, das geistig ebenso seine wohltätigen Wirkungen herunterschickt, wie die physische Sonne ihre wohltätigen Wirkungen in Licht und Wärme sendet. — Ahura Mazdao, den man später mit anderen Worten den Christus nannte, den verkündete Zarathustra dem persischen Volke. Er verkündete ihn noch nicht als ein Wesen, das auf der Erde gewandelt ist; er konnte nur hinweisen zur Sonne und sagen: Da oben wohnt er; er nähert sich allmählich der Erde und wird einstmals in einem Leibe auf der Erde wohnen.
[ 7 ] Hier kann uns auch der große, gewaltige Unterschied des Zarathustrismus und des Buddhismus aufgehen. Es ist ein tiefgehender Unterschied zwischen beiden, solange sie getrennt waren; und die Uhnterschiede gleichen sich aus in dem Momente, als sie durch die Ereignisse von Palästina zusammenfließen und wieder verjüngt werden.
[ 8 ] Lenken wir noch einmal den Blick zurück auf das, was der Buddha der Welt zu geben hatte. Wir haben die Lehre des Buddha aufgezählt als den achtgliedrigen Pfad, als das, was die Menschenseele als ihren Inhalt aufzunehmen hat, wenn sie den schlimmen Wirkungen des Karma entgehen will. Was Buddha der Welt gab, war das, was die Menschen im Laufe der Zeit aus ihrer eigenen Gesinnung und Moral zu entwickeln haben als Mitleid und Liebe. Ich habe Ihnen auch gesagt, daß in dem Augenblicke, als das Bodhisattva-Wesen in Buddha erschien, ein einzigartiger Zeitpunkt vorliegt. Wäre es damals nicht geschehen, daß der Bodhisattva vollständig in dem Leibe des großen Gautama Buddha erschienen wäre, dann hätte nicht in die eigene menschliche Seele aller Menschen dasjenige übergehen können, was wir Gesetzmäßigkeit, Dharma, nennen, die der Mensch aus sich selbst heraus nur entwickeln kann, wenn er seinen astralischen Inhalt aus sich heraussetzt, um sich zu befreien von allen schlimmen Wirkungen des Karma. Das wird uns auch in großartiger Weise in der Buddha-Legende angedeutet, indem gesagt wird, daß Buddha dahin gelangt, «das Rad des Gesetzes zu rollen». Das heißt, es ging wirklich von der Erleuchtung des Bodhisattva zum Buddha eine Stromwelle über die ganze Menschheit hin, und die Folge davon war, daß die Menschen jetzt aus ihrer eigenen Seele heraus Dharma entwickeln konnten und nach und nach sich hinaufschwingen können zu der ganzen Tiefe des achtgliedrigen Pfades. Dort liegt der Ursprung, als der Buddha zuerst die Lehre entwickelte, die eigentlich der moralischen Gesinnung der Erdenmenschen zugrunde zu legen war.
[ 9 ] Das war die Aufgabe dieses Bodhisattva. Und wie die einzelnen Aufgaben auf die großen Individualitäten verteilt sind, das ersehen wir, wenn wir ursprünglich im Buddhismus groß und gewaltig alles finden, was der Mensch in seiner eigenen Seele als sein großes Ideal erleben kann. Das Ideal der menschlichen Seele, was der Mensch ist und sein kann, das ist der Inhalt der Predigt des Buddha. Aber das war auch genug für diese Individualität. Alles ist Innerlichkeit im Buddhismus, alles bezieht sich auf den Menschen und seine Entwickelung, und wir finden nichts im ursprünglichen, wirklichen Buddhismus von dem, was wir kosmologische Lehren nennen können, wenn sie auch später hineingetragen worden sind. Es muß ja alles zusammengegliedert werden. Aber die eigentliche Mission des Bodhisattva war diese: den Menschen die Lehre von der Innerlichkeit der ureigenen Seele zu bringen. So lehnt es der Buddha in gewissen Predigten sogar ab, über die kosmischen Zusammenhänge etwas Besonderes zu sagen. Alles wird so geprägt, daß die menschliche Seele, wenn sie die Lehre des Buddha auf sich wirken läßt, immer besser und besser werden kann. Der Mensch wird aufgefaßt als ein Wesen in sich; abgesehen wird von dem großen Mutterschoße des Universums, aus dem der Mensch hervorgegangen ist. Weil das die besondere Mission des Bodhisattva war, deshalb wirkt die Lehre des Buddha, wenn sie wahr erkannt wird, so warm und innerlich auf die menschliche Seele, und deshalb erscheint sie der menschlichen Seele, die sich mit ihr befassen will, so gefühlsmäßig durchdrungen, so innerlich warm da, wo sie, wiederum verjüngt, in dem Evangelium des Lukas auftritt.
[ 10 ] Eine ganz andere Aufgabe hatte die Individualität, die als Zarathustra im alten persischen Volke inkarniert war, ganz die entgegengesetzte Aufgabe. Zarathustra lehrte, den Gott draußen, den großen Kosmos geistig zu begreifen und geistig zu durchdringen. Buddha lenkte den Blick auf die Innerlichkeit und sagte: Wenn sich der Mensch entwickelt, so treten aus dem Nichtwissen allmählich auf die «sechs Organe», die wir aufgezählt haben als die fünf Sinnesorgane und das Manas. — Alles aber, was im Menschen ist, ist aus der großen Welt herausgeboren. Wir hätten kein lichtempfindendes Auge, wenn das Licht nicht das Auge aus dem Organismus herausgeboren hätte. «Das Auge ist am Lichte für das Licht geschaffen», sagt Goethe. Das ist eine tiefe Wahrheit. Aus gleichgültigen Organen, die einst im Menschenleibe waren, hat das Licht das Auge herausgebildet. Ebenso bilden alle geistigen Kräfte in der Welt am Menschen. Was in ihm innerlich ist, das ist zuerst aus den göttlich-geistigen Kräften zusammenorganisiert. Für alles Innerliche findet sich daher ein Außerliches. Es strömen von außen die Kräfte in den Menschen ein, die dann in ihm sind. Und Zarathustra hatte die Aufgabe, auf das hinzuweisen, was Äußeres ist, was in der Umgebung des Menschen ist. Daher sprach er zum Beispiel von den Amshaspands, von den großen Genien, von denen er zunächst sechs aufzählte - eigentlich sind es zwölf, aber die anderen sechs sind verborgen. Diese Amshaspands wirken von außen organisierend als die Bildner und Gestalter der Organe des Menschen. Zarathustra zeigte, wie hinter den Sinnesorganen des Menschen die Schöpfer des Menschen stehen. Auf die großen Genien, auf die Kräfte, die wir außer uns finden, wies Zarathustra hin. Was als Kräfte im Menschen wirkt, was verborgene Kräfte im Menschen sind, darauf wies Buddha hin. Zarathustra aber wies dann auf diejenigen Kräfte und Wesenheiten, die unter den Amshaspands stehen, die er die achtundzwanzig Izards oder Izeds nannte, und die wieder von außen in den Menschen hineinwirken, um mit an seiner inneren Organisation zu arbeiten. Also wieder auf das Geistige im Kosmos, auf die äußeren Zusammenhänge wies Zarathustra hin. Und während der Buddha auf die eigentliche Denksubstanz hinwies, woraus die Gedanken aus der menschlichen.Seele aufsteigen, wies Zarathustra zu den Farohars oder Feruers oder Frawarschai hin, zu den weltschöpferischen Gedanken, die uns umgeben, die überall in der Welt zerstreut sind. Denn was der Mensch an Gedanken hat, das ist überall in der Welt draußen vorhanden.
[ 11 ] So hatte Zarathustra eine Weltanschauung zu verkünden, die sich mit der Entzifferung, mit der Zergliederung der äußeren Welt zu befassen hatte. Er hatte eine Weltanschauung für ein Volk zu liefern, das äußerlich Hand anzulegen, das die äußere Welt zu bearbeiten hatte. Ganz im Einklang ist die Mission des Zarathustra mit den Charaktereigentümlichkeiten des urpersischen Volkes. So könnten wir auch sagen, daß es dem Zarathustra beschieden war, Kraft und Tüchtigkeit in der äußeren Weltenwirkung heranzuerziehen, wenn dies auch zunächst in einer vielleicht für den heutigen Menschen abstoßenden Weise zum Ausdruck kam. Kraft und Tüchtigkeit und Sicherheit für das äußere Wirken zu erzeugen durch das Wissen, daß der Mensch nicht nur in seinem Innern geborgen ist, sondern daß er im Schoße einer göttlichgeistigen Welt ruht, das war die Mission des Zarathustra — hinzuweisen darauf, daß der Mensch sich sagt: Wo du auch immer im Weltall stehst, du stehst nicht allein, du stehst in einem durchgeistigten Kosmos und bist ein Teil der Weltengötter und Weltengeister, du bist herausgeboren aus dem Geiste und ruhst darinnen. Mit jedem Atemzuge saugst du göttlichen Geist ein, mit jedem Atemzuge magst du dem großen Geiste ein Opfer bringen, indem du ausatmest. — Daher mußte auch die Einweihung des Zarathustra entsprechend seiner Mission eine andere sein als die der anderen großen Missionare der Menschheit.
[ 12 ] Erinnern wir uns nun, was jene Individualität tun durfte, die in Zarathustra inkarniert war. Sie stand auf einer solchen Höhe der Entwickelung,.daß sie vorsorgen konnte für die nächste Kulturströmung nach der urpersischen, für die ägyptische Kultur. — Zwei Schüler hatte Zarathustra: diejenige Individualität, die später als der ägyptische Hermes wiedererschien, und jene, die später als Moses wiedererschien. Und als die beiden Individualitäten wieder in der Menschheit zu ihrem weiteren Wirken inkarniert wurden, da wurde der Astralleib des Zarathustra, den er als Opfer hingegeben hatte, dem Hermes eingegliedert. Eine Wiederverkörperung des Astralleibes des Zarathustra haben wir in dem ägyptischen Hermes zu sehen. Hermes trug in sich den Astralleib des Zarathustra, der ihm übergeben wurde, damit alles, was Zarathustra an äußerer Weltwissenschaft in sich aufgenommen hatte, in der äußeren Welt wiedererstehen konnte. Und es wurde an Moses der Ätherleib des Zarathustra übertragen; und weil mit dem Ätherleibe alles verknüpft ist, was sich in der Zeit entwickelt, so konnte Moses, als er sich der Geheimnisse seines Ätherleibes bewußt wurde, auferwecken die Vorgänge in der Zeit in großen, gewaltigen Bildern, wie sie uns in der Genesis entgegentreten. So wirkte Zarathustra durch die Gewalt seiner Individualität weiter, inaugurierend, influenzierend die ägyptische Kultur und das, was sich aus dieser bildete als die althebräische Kultur.
[ 13 ] Eine solche Individualität ist zu Großem berufen auch durch ihr Ich. Das Ich des Zarathustra inkarnierte sich in anderen Persönlichkeiten immer wieder. Denn eine Individualität, die es so weit gebracht hat, kann sich immer wieder einen astralischen Leib heiligen und einen Ätherleib stark machen, auch wenn sie die ursprünglichen abgegeben hat. So wurde auch Zarathustra wiedergeboren und erschien wieder sechshundert Jahre vor unserer Zeitrechnung im alten Chaldäa als Zarathas oder Nazarathos, der der Lehrer der chaldäischen Geheimschule wie auch der Lehrer des Pythagoras wurde und große, gewaltige Einblicke in die äußere Welt gewinnen konnte. Wenn wir uns mit wahrem Verständnis in die Weisheit der Chaldäer hineinversetzen mit dem, was uns nicht die Anthropologie, sondern die Anthroposophie zu geben vermag, dann bekommen wir eine Ahnung davon, was Zarathustra als Zarathas in den Geheimschulen der alten Chaldäer lehren konnte.
[ 14 ] Alles, was Zarathustra lehren und der Welt bringen konnte, das zielte, wie wir gesehen haben, auf die äußere Welt ab, um in die äußere Welt Ordnung und Harmonie zu bringen. Daher war auch die Kunst, Reiche zu bilden und zu organisieren, wie esdem Fortgange der Menschheit entspricht, und was die sozialeOrdnung möglich macht, die Mission des Zarathustra. Und daher können diejenigen, die zu den Schülern des Zarathustra gehörten, mit Recht nicht nur große Magier, große Eingeweihte, sondern auch immer Könige genannt werden, das heißt solche, welche die Kunst der Herstellung äußerer sozialer Organisation und Ordnung kennen.
[ 15 ] Eine ungeheure Anhänglichkeit entwickelte sich in den Schulen der Chaldäer zu der Individualität — nicht zu der Persönlichkeit — des Zarathustra. Sie fühlten sich verwandt, diese Weisen des Morgenlandes, mit ihrem großen Führer. Sie sahen in ihm den Stern der Menschheit, denn «Zoroaster» ist eine Umschreibung des Wortes «Goldstern» oder «Stern des Glanzes». Sie sahen in ihm einen Abglanz der Sonne selbst. Und aus ihrer tiefen Weisheit heraus konnte es ihnen nicht verborgen bleiben, als ihr Meister in Bethlehem wiedererschien. Da wurden sie durch ihren Stern geführt und brachten ihm die äußeren Zeichen für das Beste, was er den Menschen hatte geben können. Das Beste, was man einem Menschen aus der Zarathustra-Strömung geben konnte, war das Wissen von der äußeren Welt, von den Geheimnissen des Kosmos, aufgenommen in den menschlichen Astralleib, in Denken, Fühlen und Wollen, so daß die Zarathustra-Schüler ihr Denken, Fühlen und Wollen, die Kräfte ihrer Seele, durchsetzen wollten mit der Weisheit, die man einsaugen kann aus den tiefen Grundlagen der göttlich-geistigen Welt. Für dieses Wissen, das man sich durch die Einsaugung der äußeren Geheimnisse zu eigen machen kann, hatte man als Symbole Gold, Weihrauch und Myrrhen: Gold als Symbolum für das Denken, Weihrauch für die Frömmigkeit, für das, was uns als Fühlen durchdringt, und Myrrhen für die Kraft des Wollens. So zeigten sie ihre Zusammengehörigkeit mit ihrem Meister, als sie vor ihm erschienen, da er wiedergeboren wurde in Bethlehem. Daher erzählt uns der Schreiber des Matthäus-Evangeliums tatsächlich richtig, wie die Weisen, unter denen der Zarathustra gewirkt hatte, wußten, daß er wiedererschienen war unter den Menschen, und wie sie durch die drei Symbole - Gold, Weihrauch und Myrrhen -, die Symbole für das Beste, was er ihnen gegeben hat, ihre Verwandtschaft mit ihm ausdrückten (Matthäus 2,11).
[ 16 ] Es handelte sich nun darum, daß der Zarathustra in der Gestalt des Jesus aus der salomonischen Linie des davidischen Geschlechtes kraftvoll wirken konnte, um in einer verjüngten Gestalt alles der Menschheit wiederzugeben, was er ihr schon früher gegeben hatte. Er mußte dazu alle Kraft zusammenfassen, die er schon einmal besessen hatte. Daher konnte er auch zunächst nicht in einen Leib hineingeboren werden, der aus der priesterlichen Linie des Hauses David stammte, sondern nur in einen solchen aus der königlichen Linie. Damit ist im Matthäus-Evangelium ausgedrückt die Verwandtschaft des Königsnamens im alten Persien mit der Abstammung jenes Kindes, in das Zarathustra inkarniert wurde. Auf diese Geschehnisse haben auch die alten Weisheitsbücher Vorderasiens immer hingedeutet. Wer diese Weisheitsbücher wirklich versteht, der liest sie anders als jene, welche die Tatsachen nicht kennen und daher alles durcheinanderwerfen. Da haben wir zum Beispiel im Alten Testament zwei Prophezeiungen, eine in den Apokryphen des Henoch, die mehr hinweist auf den nathanischen Messias aus der priesterlichen Linie, und eine in den Psalmen, die hingeht auf den Messias aus der königlichen Linie. Alles einzelne, was in den Schriften gemeint ist, stimmt mit den Tatsachen, die wir aus der Akasha-Chronik gewinnen können, überein. Aber alles einzelne mußte der Zarathustra jetzt zusammennehmen, was einst an Kräften in ihm war. An die ägyptische und an die althebräische Kultur - an Hermes und an Moses — hatte er abgegeben, was in seinem Astralleibe und in seinem ÄÄtherleibe war. Damit mußte er sich wieder vereinigen. Er mußte gleichsam wieder zurückholen die Kräfte seines Ätherleibes aus Agypten. Ein tiefes Geheimnis tut sich da vor unseren Augen auf: der Jesus der salomonischen Linie des Hauses David, der der wiederverkörperte Zarathustra ist, muß nach Ägypten geführt werden; und er wird dahin geführt. Denn da sind dieKräfte, die seinem Astralleib und Ätherleib entströmt sind, die er abgegeben hat zuerst an Hermes und dann an Moses. Weil er auf die ägyptische Kultur gewirkt hatte, mußte er gleichsam wieder zurückholen die Kräfte, die er dahin abgegeben hatte. Deshalb die «Flucht nach Ägypten» und das, was geistig geschah, die Aufsaugung aller der Kräfte, die er jetzt brauchte, um kraftvoll der Menschheit in verjüngter Form das wiederzugeben, was er ihr in den verflossenen Zeiten gegeben hatte.
[ 17 ] So sehen wir, wie der bethlehemitische Jesus, dessen Eltern also früher in Bethlehem ansässig waren, von Matthäus richtig geschildert wird. Nur Lukas erzählt, daß die Eltern seines Jesus in Nazareth ansässig waren, daß sie zur Schätzung nach Bethlehem gingen und daß in dieser kurzen Zeit der Jesus des Lukas dort geboren wurde, worauf dann die Eltern wieder nach Nazareth zurückgingen. Im MatthäusEvangelium wird nur darauf hingewiesen, daß der Jesus in Bethlehem geboren wird und daß er nach Ägypten geführt werden muß. Erst nach der Rückkehr aus Ägypten siedeln sich seine Eltern in Nazareth an, um den Jesus, der der wiederverkörperte Zarathustra ist, in der Nähe dessen zu haben, der die andere Strömung, den Buddhismus darstellt. So werden im Konkreten die beiden Weltanschauungen zusammengeführt.
[ 18 ] Wo die Evangelien ganz tief werden, da zeigen sie uns auch in aller Tiefe das, worum es sich handelt. Was bei den Menschen mehr zusammenhängt mit dem Wollen und der Kraft, mit dem königlichen Element - wenn wir den Ausdruck technisch gebrauchen -, von dem wußten die Menschen, welche die Geheimnisse des Daseins kannten, daß es in der äußeren Vererbung übertragen wird von dem väterlichen Element. Was aber zusammenhängt mit dem innerlichen Element, mit Weisheit und innerer Beweglichkeit des Geistes, das wird übertragen durch das mütterliche Element. Goethe, der so tief in die Geheimnisse des Daseins hineingeschaut hat, deutet uns diesen Zusammenhang in den Worten an:
Vom Vater hab’ ich die Statur,
Des Lebens ernstes Führen,
Vom Mütterchen die Frohnatur
Und Lust zu fabulieren
[ 19 ] — eine Wahrheit, die Sie so oft in der Welt bestätigt finden können. Die Statur, die äußere Gestalt, was sich in der äußeren Gestalt unmittelbar ausdrückt, und «des Lebens ernstes Führen», was mit dem Charakter des Ich zusammenhängt, das ererbt der Mensch von dem väterlichen Element. Deshalb mußte der salomonische Jesus vor allem von dem väterlichen Element die Kraft erben, weil es immer seine Mission war: die Überführung dessen in die Welt, was die Welt im Raume an göttlichen Kräften umstrahlt. Das drückt der Schreiber des Matthäus-Evangeliums so großartig aus, wie man es nur ausdrücken kann. Daß sich eine besondere Individualität verkörpern wird, das wird aus der geistigen Welt heraus als ein bedeutsames Ereignis verkündet, und es wird nicht der Maria, sondern dem Vater, dem Joseph, verkündet (Matthäus 1, 20-21). Hinter alledem verbergen sich die tiefsten Wahrheiten; nicht als Zufälliges darf man so etwas nehmen. — Auf den Jesus aus der nathanischen Linie gingen über die innerlichen Eigenschaften, die sich von der Mutter vererben. Daher mußte der Jesus des LukasEvangeliums der Mutter verkündet werden, und wir sehen auch im Lukas-Evangelium die Verkündigung an die Mutter geschehen (Lukas 1, 26-38). So tief drücken sich die Tatsachen in den religiösen Schriften aus. Aber gehen wir weiter.
[ 20 ] Auch in all den anderen Tatsachen, die geschildert werden, drückt sich Bedeutsames aus. Zunächst soll der Vorläufer des Jesus von Nazareth in dem Täufer Johannes der Menschheit erstehen. Wir können uns erst im Laufe der Zeit näher auf die Individualität des Täufers einlassen. Nehmen wir ihn zunächst hin, wie er uns im Bilde entgegentritt, wie er vorherzuverkünden hat, was da kommen soll in dem Jesus. Er verkündet es, indem er mit einer unendlich starken Kraft alles zusammenfaßt, was im äußeren Gesetz, was in der alten Verkündigung lag. Daß die Menschen halten, was im Gesetz geschrieben steht, was alt geworden ist in der Kultur, was die Menschen aber vergessen haben, was reif ist, was die Menschen aber nicht mehr beachten, das will ihnen der Täufer bringen. Er muß daher vor allen Dingen die Kraft in sich haben, die eine Seele hat, die reif, überreif in die Welt hineingeboren wird. Er wird geboren von einem alten Elternpaare, wird so geboren, daß sein astralischer Leib von Anfang an gegenüber all den Kräften, die den Menschen herunterziehen, rein und geläutert ist, weil Leidenschaft und Begierde bei dem alten Elternpaar nicht mitwirken. Das ist wiederum eine tiefe Weisheit, die uns da im Lukas-Evangelium angedeutet wird (Lukas 1, 18). Für eine solche Individualität wird auch von der großen Mutterloge der Menschheit aus gesorgt. Da, wo der große Manu die Vorgänge im Geistigen lenkt und leitet, da werden die Ströme dahin gesendet, wo sie gebraucht werden. Ein solches Ich wie das Ich Johannes des Täufers wird hineingeboren in einen Leib unmittelbar unter der Lenkung und Leitung der großen Mutterloge der Menschheit, der Zentralstätte des irdischen Geisteslebens. Aus derselben Stätte stammte das Johannes-Ich, aus der auch das Seelenwesen für das Jesuskind des Lukas-Evangeliums stammte, nur daß dem Jesus mehr jene Eigenschaften übergeben wurden, die noch nicht durchdrungen waren von dem egoistisch gewordenen Ich, das heißt, eine junge Seele wird dorthin gelenkt, wo der wiedergeborene Adam inkarniert werden soll.
[ 21 ] Es wird Ihnen sonderbar erscheinen, daß hier einmal von der großen Mutterloge aus an eine Stätte eine Seele hingelenkt werden konnte ohne ein eigentliches ausgebildetes Ich. Denn dasselbe Ich, das im Grunde genommen dem Jesus des Lukas-Evangeliums vorenthalten wird, das wird dem Körper Johannes des Täufers beschert, und dieses beides, was als Seelenwesen lebt im Jesus des Lukas-Evangeliums und was als Ich im Täufer Johannes lebt, das steht von Anfang an in einer innerlichen Beziehung. Wenn. sich der menschliche Keim im mütterlichen Leibe entwickelt, dann vereinigt sich allerdings in der dritten Woche das Ich mit den anderen Gliedern der menschlichen Organisation, aber es kommt erst in den letzten Monaten vor der Geburt nach und nach zur Wirksamkeit. Da erst wird das Ich eine innerliche, bewegende Kraft. Denn in einem normalen Falle, wo das Ich in gewöhnlicher Weise wirkt, um den Menschenkeim zur Bewegung zu bringen, da haben wir es mit einem Ich zu tun, das aus früheren Inkarnationen herstammt und den menschlichen Keim zur Bewegung bringt. Hier aber, bei dem Johannes, haben wir es mit einem Ich zu tun, das in Zusammenhang steht mit der Seelenwesenheit des nathanischen Jesus. Daher muß sich im Lukas-Evangelium die Mutter des Jesus zu der Mutter des Täufers Johannes begeben, als diese im sechsten Monate der Schwangerschaft ist, und was sonst durch das eigene Ich angeregt wird in der eigenen Persönlichkeit, das wird hier angeregt durch die andere Leibesfrucht. Das Kind der Elisabeth beginnt sich zu bewegen, als sich ihm nähert die Frau, die das Jesuskind in sich trägt; denn es ist das Ich, durch welches das Kind in der anderen Mutter angeregt wird (Lukas 1, 39-44). So tief ist der Zusammenhang zwischen demjenigen, der da wirken sollte zu dem Zusammenströmen der beiden Geistesströmungen, und dem, der ihn vorherverkünden sollte.
[ 22 ] So sehen wir, wie im Beginne unserer Zeitrechnung in der Tat etwas vor sich geht, was außerordentlich großartig ist. Wenn die Menschen die Wahrheit gewöhnlich gern einfach haben möchten, so rührt das von der menschlichen Bequemlichkeit her, die sich nicht gerne viel Begriffe machen will; aber die größten Wahrheiten sind auch nur durch die größten Anstrengungen der geistigen Kräfte zu schauen. Wenn der Mensch schon die größten Anstrengungen machen muß, um eine Maschine zu beschreiben, so darf er erst recht nicht verlangen wollen, daß die größten Wahrheiten auch die einfachsten sein sollen. Die Wahrheit ist groß und deshalb kompliziert, und wir müssen unsere geistigen Kräfte schon anstrengen, wenn wir nach und nach die Wahrheiten verstehen wollen, die sich auf das Ereignis von Palästina beziehen. Es möge sich auch keiner dem Einwand hingeben, daß die Dinge zu kompliziert dargestellt würden; sie werden so dargestellt, wie sie sind, und sie sind so, weil wir es mit der größten Tatsache der Erdenentwickelung zu tun haben.
[ 23 ] So sehen wir zwei Jesuskinder heranwachsen, einmal den Sohn des nathanischen Elternpaares Joseph und Maria, und wir sehen diesen Sohn geboren werden von einer jungen Mutter - im Hebräischen würde man das Wort Alma dafür gebraucht haben -; denn das, was als eine junge Seele wirken sollte, mußte von einer ganz jungen Mutter geboren werden. Mit diesem Sohne wohnte dasElternpaar nach der Rückkehr aus Bethlehem wieder in Nazareth. Sie hatten keine anderen Kinder. Es war der Mutter aufgespart, einzig und allein die Mutter dieses Jesus zu sein.— Dann haben wir den Jesus des Elternpaares Joseph und Maria aus der salomonischen Linie. Nachdem dieses Elternpaar aus Ägypten zurückgekehrt und nach Nazareth übergesiedelt war, bekam es noch eine Reihe von Kindern, die Sie im Markus-Evangelium angeführt finden: Simon, Judas, Joses, Jakobus und auch zwei Schwestern (Markus 6, 3). — Die beiden Jesuskinder wachsen heran. Das Kind, welches die Zarathustra-Individualität in sich birgt, entwickelt nach und nach mit einer ungeheuer schnellen Reifung diejenigen Kräfte, die es entwickeln muß, wenn eine so mächtige Individualität in dem Körper tätig ist. Die Individualität, die in dem Körper des anderen Jesus tätig ist, ist von anderer Art. Das Wichtigste ist ja an ihr der Nirmanakaya des Buddha. Das ist etwas, was auf diesem Kinde ruht. Daher wird uns auch gesagt, als die Eltern von Jerusalem zurückkommen: Das Kind ist voll Weisheit — das heißt, in seinem Ätherleibe ist es durchströmt von Weisheit -, und die Gnade des Gottes ist über ihm (Lukas 2, 40). Aber es wuchs so heran, daß es die gewöhnlichen menschlichen Eigenschaften, die sich auf Verstehen und Erkennen in der äußeren Welt beziehen, außerordentlich langsam entwickelte. Der triviale Mensch würde gerade dieses Jesuskind ein «verhältnismäßig zurückgebliebenes Kind» genannt haben, wenn er nur auf das gesehen hätte, was Kräfte zum Verstehen und Begreifen der äußeren Welt sind. Dafür aber entwickelte sich gerade in diesem Kinde das, was herunterströmte aus dem es beschattenden Nirmanakaya des Buddha. Es entwickelte eine Tiefe der Innerlichkeit, die sich mit nichts an Innerlichkeit in der Welt vergleichen läßt. Es entwickelte sich eine Gefühlstiefe in dem Knaben, die auf die ganze Umgebung in außerordentlicher Art wirkte. - So sehen wir eine gefühlstiefe Wesenheit in dem nathanischen Jesus heranwachsen, und wir sehen eine Individualität mit einer ungeheuren Reife, mit einem tiefen Weltverständnis in dem salomonischen Jesus heranwachsen.
[ 24 ] Nun war der Mutter des nathanischen Jesus, jenes gefühlstiefen Kindes, Bedeutsames gesagt worden. Schon als Simeon dem neugeborenen Kinde gegenüberstand und es überstrahlt sah von dem, den er einst in Indien als Buddha noch nicht hatte sehen können, da sagte er voraus das Große und Gewaltige, was sich jetzt vollziehen sollte; aber er sagte auch die großen, bedeutungsvollen Worte von dem «Schwert, das der Mutter durch das Herz gehen» sollte (Lukas 2, 35). Auch dieses Wort bezieht sich auf etwas, was wir heute noch verstehen lernen wollen.
[ 25 ] In unmittelbarer Nachbarschaft und unter den freundschaftlichen Beziehungen der Eltern wuchsen die beiden Kinder heran und entwickelten sich beide ungefähr bis zu ihrem zwölften Jahre. Als das zwölfte Jahr des nathanischen Jesus herankam, begaben sich dessen Eltern nach Jerusalem, wie gesagt wird, der Sitte gemäß, um an dem Osterfeste teilzunehmen, und sie nahmen das Kind mit, wie es gebräuchlich war, wenn die Kinder reif wurden. Nun findet sich im Lukas-Evangelium in außerordentlich geheimnisvoller Weise eine Erzählung von dem zwölfjährigen Jesus im Tempel. Es heißt da: Als sich die Eltern wieder zurückbegaben von dem Fest, vermißten sie plötzlich den Knaben, und als sie ihn nirgends unter der Reisegesellschaft fanden, da begaben sie sich wieder zurück und fanden ihn im Tempel mitten unter den großen Lehrern, alle erstaunend durch seine Weisheit (Lukas 2, 41-50).
[ 26 ] Was war da geschehen? Fragen wir darüber die unvergängliche Akasha-Chronik. Die Tatsachen der Welt sind nicht so ganz einfach. Was hier geschehen war, das geschieht in anderer Weise auch sonst in der Welt. Es kommt vor, daß eine Individualität auf einer gewissen Entwickelungsstufe andere Bedingungen braucht, als sie ihr von Anfang an gegeben wurden. Daher kommt es immer wieder vor, daß ein Mensch bis zu einem gewissen Lebensalter heranwächst —- und dann auf einmal in Ohnmacht fällt und wie tot ist. Da geht dann eine Umwandlung vor sich: es verläßt ihn sein eigenes Ich, und ein anderes Ich nimmt in seiner Körperlichkeit Platz. Eine solche Umlagerung des Ich findet auch in anderen Fällen statt; das ist eine Erscheinung, die jeder Okkultist kennt. Hier, bei dem zwölfjährigen Jesus war folgendes geschehen: Jene Ichheit, die bis dahin als Zarathustra-Ichheit den Körper des Jesus aus der königlichen Linie des davidischen Geschlechtes gebrauchte, um auf die Höhe seiner Zeit zu kommen, drang aus dem Körper des salomonischen Jesusknaben heraus und übertrug sich auf den nathanischen Jesus, der daher wie ein Verwandelter erschien. Die Eltern erkannten ihn nicht wieder, sie verstanden seine Worte nicht. Denn jetzt sprach aus dem nathanischen Jesus das Zarathustra-Ich, das sich auf ihn übertragen hatte. Das war der Zeitpunkt, als der Nirmanakaya des Buddha sich mit dem ausgeschiedenen astralischen Mutterleibe vereinigte, und das war auch der Zeitpunkt, da sich das Zarathustra-Ich mit dem nathanischen Jesus vereinigte. Jetzt lebte das Zarathustra-Ich in dem nathanischen Jesus. Und dieses Kind, das so verwandelt war,daß es dieEltern nicht verstehen konnten, das nahmen sie jetzt mit nach Hause.
[ 27 ] In nicht zu ferner Zeit starb dann die Mutter dieses Jesuskindes, so daß dieses Kind, in dem das Zarathustra-Ich jetzt wohnte, von mütterlicher Seite her verwaist war. Wir werden sehen, daß die Tatsache, daß diese Mutter starb und das Kind verwaist zurückließ, noch auf einen besonders tiefen Zusammenhang hinweist. -— Auch das andere Kind konnte nicht unter gewöhnlichen Verhältnissen fortleben, als das Zarathustra-Ich es verlassen hatte. Der Joseph aus der salomonischen Linie war schon früher gestorben, und die Mutter des salomonischen Jesuskindes mit ihren Kindern, dem Jakobus, Joses, Judas, Simon und den beiden Töchtern, wurde in dem Hause des nathanischen Joseph aufgenommen, so daß also der Zarathustra jetzt wieder zusammenlebte mit derjenigen Familie, in die er sich hineininkarniert hatte, bis auf den Vater. Auf diese Weise haben sich die beiden Familien in eine zusammengesetzt, und so lebt denn die Mutter der Geschwister — wir können sie Geschwister nennen, denn nach dem Ich hin sind sie Geschwister — in dem Hause des nathanischen Joseph mit dem Jesus, der aber seiner Vaterstadt nach, leiblich, in Nazareth heimisch war. So lebte er mit ihnen zusammen.
[ 28 ] So sehen wir im Konkreten den Zusammenfluß des Buddhismus und des Zarathustrismus. Denn jener Leib, in dem die reife Ich-Seele des Zarathustra war, konnte das in sich aufnehmen und mit sich vereinigen, was dadurch geworden war, daß der Nirmanakaya des Buddha die abgegebene astralische Mutterhülle des nathanischen Jesus aufgenommen hatte. So sehen wir jetzt eine Individualität heranwachsen in dem Jesus von Nazareth, die in sich trägt die Ichheit des Zarathustra, welche bestrahlt und durchgeistigt ist von dem verjüngten Nirmanakaya des Buddha. Was der Zusammenfluß des Buddhismus und des Zarathustrismus ist, das sehen wir in der Seele des Jesus von Nazareth auf diese Art leben. Da auch der Joseph aus der nathanischen Linie starb, und zwar verhältnismäßig früh, so ist eigentlich in Wahrheit das ZarathustraKind ein Waisenkind; es fühlt sich verwaist. Es ist nicht das, was es seiner leiblichen Abstammung nach ist. Es ist dem Geiste nach der wiedererstandene Zarathustra. Der leiblichen Abstammung nach ist sein Vater der Joseph der nathanischen Linie, und der äußeren Anschauung nach mußte es die Welt dafür halten. Lukas erzählt es uns genau, und wir müssen seine Worte genau nehmen:
«Und es begab sich, da sich alles Volk taufen ließ und Jesus auch getauft war und betete, daß sich der Himmel auftat; und der Heilige Geist fuhr hernieder in leiblicher Gestalt auf ihn wie eine Taube, und eine Stimme kam aus dem Himmel, die sprach: Du bist mein lieber Sohn, heute habe ich dich gezeugt. Und Jesus war, da er anfing zu wirken, ungefähr dreißig Jahre alt...»
[ 29 ] und jetzt wird nicht einfach gesagt, daß er ein Sohn des Joseph ist, sondern es heißt:
[ 30 ] «...und ward gehalten für einen Sohn Josephs» (Lukas 3, 21-23), denn das Ich hatte sich ursprünglich in dem salomonischen Jesus inkarniert, hatte also im Grunde nichts mit dem nathanischen Joseph zu tun.
[ 31 ] Nun haben wir eine einheitliche Wesenheit vor uns in dem Jesus von Nazareth, die ein großes, gewaltiges Inneres hatte, in dem sich alles vereinigte, was wir an Segnungen des Buddhismus, und alles, was wir an Segnungen des Zarathustrismus erkennen. Jene Innerlichkeit war zu Großem, Gewaltigem später berufen. Mit ihr mußte noch etwas ganz anderes geschehen als mit denen, die Johannes im Jordan taufte. Und wir werden sehen, daß später diese Innerlichkeit die Individualität des Christus im Jordan aufzunehmen hatte. Da senkte sich auch wieder das Unsterbliche der ursprünglichen Mutter des nathanischen Jesus herab und verwandelte diejenige Mutter, die in dem Hause des ° nathanischen Joseph aufgenommen war, und machte sie wieder jungfräulich, so daß die Seele jener Mutter, die der Jesus verloren hatte, ihm bei der Johannes-Taufe wiedergegeben wird. Diese Mutter, die ihm geblieben ist, birgt also in sich die Seele seiner ursprünglichen Mutter, die in der Bibel die gebenedeite Maria genannt wird (Lukas 1, 28).
Fifth lecture
[ 1 ] The great spiritual currents of humanity, which make their way through the world, all have their special mission. They do not pass through the world in isolation, but only pass through certain epochs separately; then they cross each other in the most diverse ways and fertilize each other. We see such a great and powerful confluence of human intellectual currents in the events in Palestine. It is our task to bring this event before our minds with ever greater clarity. But world views do not take the path that one might imagine in the abstract, as if they were walking in the air and converging on a single point. Rather, world views take paths through beings, through individualities. Where a world view first appears, it must be carried by an individuality. Where spiritual currents flow together and cross-fertilize each other, something very special must also take place in those who are the bearers of these world views.
[ 2 ] Some may have found it very complicated in yesterday's lecture to see how the two great spiritual currents of Buddhism and Zoroastrianism meet in the concrete in the event of Palestine. If we were to speak only in the abstract and not go directly to the events, we would only have to show how these two world views combine. But as anthroposophists, we have the task of pointing out both the individuals who were the bearers of the two worldviews and what is present in them; for the anthroposophist should move more and more from the abstract to the concrete. So you must not be surprised that where something great and powerful was to happen, there was also a great external complication of facts, that Zoroastrianism and Buddhism could not easily flow together. This had to be prepared slowly and gradually.
[ 3 ] Thus we see how Buddhism flowed in and took effect in the personality of him who was born to Joseph and Mary of the Nathanic line of the house of David, the child of whom we are told in the Gospel according to St. Luke. On the other hand, we have, descending from the Solomonic line of the Davidic race, Joseph and Mary with the child Jesus, who originally lived in Bethlehem and who is described to us by the writer of the Gospel according to Matthew. This child Jesus from the Solomonic line is the bearer of that individuality which once founded the ancient Persian culture as Zarathustra. Thus we have at the starting point of our era, as actual individuals standing side by side, the two currents of Buddhism on the one hand, as it is first described to us in the Gospel of Luke, and Zoroastrianism on the other, as it is described to us by Matthew in the Jesus from the Solomon line of the Davidic dynasty. The dates of the births of these two boys do not exactly coincide.
[ 4 ] Of course, today I have to say something that is not in the Gospels; but you will understand the Gospels more precisely when you learn something from the Akasha Chronicle, the effects and consequences of which the Gospels hint at, but which they could not tell themselves. It must be firmly held that what is stated at the end of the Gospel of John applies to all the Gospels: “It is not enough that books should be written about the things that have been done.” (John 21:25). And the revelations that have come to humanity through Christianity are not of the kind that are once concluded and written in books and thus given to the world as a whole in book form. The words, “Lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world” (Matthew 28:20), are true. The Christ is present, not as one dead, but as one alive. Those whose spiritual eyes are open can learn from him again and again what he has to give us. Christianity is a living spiritual current, and its revelations will continue as long as people are able to receive the revelations. Thus, today some facts will be mentioned that are found in the Gospels in their consequences, but which are not in them themselves. However, you can thoroughly examine them on the basis of the external facts, and you will then find them to be true.
[ 5 ] Thus the births of the two Jesus boys were separated by a few months. But both the Jesus of Luke's Gospel and that of John were born so much later that the so-called Bethlehem infanticide could not affect them. Have you ever considered that anyone reading about the Bethlehem Massacre should ask: Why then could there have been another John? But the facts are such that you can find them to be true in spite of everything. Imagine that the Jesus of the Gospel of Matthew is taken to Egypt by his parents and that John is born shortly before or at the same time. According to the usual view, he remains in Palestine, where he should actually have been affected by what Herod had decreed. He should actually have died as a result of Herod's murder and could not have been there. You see that one really has to think about all these things. Because if all children in their first two years of life were really killed at that time, John should have been killed as well. But you will find it understandable if you take the facts from the Akasha Chronicle and realize that the events of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke do not fall in the same period, so that the birth of Jesus of Nazareth does not fall in the time of the Betlehhemite infanticide. And it is the same with John. Although there are only months in between, they are enough to make these facts possible.
[ 6 ] Likewise, you will learn to understand the Jesus of the Gospel of Matthew from the more intimate facts. The individuality that we have come to know as the Zarathustra of the ancient Persian culture is re-embodied in this boy. We know of this Zarathustra that he once gave his Persian people the great teaching of Ahura Mazdao, the great sun being. We know that we have to imagine this sun being as the spiritual-soul part of what the outer physical sun represents to us as the physical part. Therefore, Zarathustra could say: “See not only the physical sun shining, but see the mighty Being who, spiritually, sends down His beneficent effects just as the physical sun sends down its beneficent effects in light and warmth.” — Ahura Mazdao, who was later called the Christ in other words, was proclaimed by Zarathustra to the Persian people. He did not yet proclaim him as a being who had walked on earth; he could only point to the sun and say: “Up there he dwells.” He is gradually approaching the earth and will one day dwell in a body on earth.
[ 7 ] Here we can also see the great, enormous difference between Zarathustrianism and Buddhism. There is a profound difference between the two as long as they were separate; and the profound differences even out at the moment when they flow together and are rejuvenated by the events in Palestine.
[ 8 ] Let us once more turn our attention to what the Buddha had to give to the world. We have enumerated the Buddha's teaching as the eight-fold path, as that which the human soul has to take up as its content if it wants to escape the dire effects of karma. What Buddha gave to the world was what people, over the course of time, have to develop out of their own attitude and morality as compassion and love. I have also told you that the moment the Bodhisattva essence appeared in Buddha was a unique moment. If the Bodhisattva had not fully appeared in the body of the great Gautama Buddha at that time, then what we call the law, the dharma, could not have been transferred into the human soul of all people. This law can only be developed by man out of himself when he releases his astral content in order to free himself from all the terrible effects of karma. This is also indicated to us in a magnificent way in the Buddha legend, where it is said that Buddha achieved 'the rolling of the wheel of the law'. This means that from the enlightenment of the Bodhisattva to the Buddha, a current wave really passed over all of humanity, and the consequence of this was that people could now develop Dharma out of their own souls and gradually rise to the full depth of the eight-limbed path. There lies the origin, when the Buddha first developed the teaching that was actually to underlie the moral character of earthlings.
[ 9 ] That was the task of this Bodhisattva. And how the individual tasks are distributed among the great personalities, we can see when we realize that in its original form, Buddhism contains everything that man can experience in his own soul as his great ideal. The ideal of the human soul, what man is and can be, that is the content of the Buddha's teaching. But that was enough for this individuality. Everything in Buddhism is inwardness, everything relates to the human being and his development. We find nothing in the original, real Buddhism that could be called cosmological teachings, even if they were later introduced. Everything must be integrated. But the actual mission of the Bodhisattva was this: to bring people the teaching of the inwardness of their own soul. Thus, in certain sermons, Buddha even declines to say anything special about cosmic interrelations. Everything is shaped in such a way that the human soul, when it allows the Buddha's teaching to take effect on it, can become better and better. Man is understood as a being in himself; apart from the great womb of the universe from which man has emerged. Because that was the special mission of the Bodhisattva, that is why the teaching of the Buddha, when truly recognized, has such a warm and inner effect on the human soul, and that is why it appears so emotionally imbued, so inwardly warm to the human soul that wants to deal with it, where it, again rejuvenated, appears in the Gospel of Luke.
[ 10 ] The individuality that had incarnated as Zarathustra among the ancient Persians had a quite different task, the opposite of the former. Zarathustra taught man to grasp and penetrate spiritually the great cosmos. Buddha directed attention inward and said: As man develops, the “six organs” gradually arise out of unknowingness. We have enumerated them as the five sense organs and the Manas. — But everything that is in man is born out of the great world. We would have no light-sensitive eye if the light had not born the eye out of the organism. “The eye is created for the light,” says Goethe. This is a profound truth. The eye has been formed out of indifferent organs that were once in the human body. Likewise, all spiritual forces in the world form in man. What is inward in him is first organized out of the divine-spiritual forces. Therefore, for everything internal there is an external counterpart. The forces flow into man from the outside and are then within him. And Zarathustra had the task of pointing out what is external, what is in man's environment. Therefore, he spoke, for example, of the Amshaspands, of the great geniuses, of whom he first enumerated six - actually there are twelve, but the other six are hidden. These Amshaspands work from the outside, organizing and forming the organs of the human being. Zarathustra showed how the creators of the human being stand behind the human sense organs. Zarathustra pointed to the great geniuses, to the forces that we find outside ourselves. What works as forces in man, what hidden forces are in man, that is what Buddha pointed out. But Zarathustra then pointed to those forces and entities that are subordinate to the Amshaspands, which he called the twenty-eight Izards or Izeds, and which in turn work from the outside into man in order to help work on his inner organization. So again Zarathustra pointed to the spiritual in the cosmos, to the outer connections. And while the Buddha pointed to the actual substance of thought, from which thoughts arise from the human soul, Zarathustra pointed to the Farohars or Feruers or Frawarschai, to the world-creative thoughts that surround us, that are scattered everywhere in the world. For whatever thoughts a person has are present everywhere in the world outside.
[ 11 ] Thus Zoroaster had to proclaim a world-view that was concerned with the deciphering and dissection of the outer world. He had to provide a world-view for a people who had to work with their hands in the outer world. Zarathustra's mission is entirely in keeping with the character peculiarities of the ancient Persian people. We could also say that it was Zarathustra's destiny to cultivate strength and efficiency in the external world, even if this was initially expressed in a way that may be repulsive to today's people. To create strength and efficiency and security for outer work by knowing that man is not only secure within himself, but also rests in the bosom of a divine spiritual world, that was the mission of Zarathustra. that man should say to himself: Wherever you stand in the universe, you do not stand alone, you stand in a spiritualized cosmos and are a part of the world gods and world spirits; you are born out of the spirit and rest in it. With every breath you draw in divine spirit; with every breath you may bring a sacrifice to the great spirit by breathing out. — Therefore, the initiation of Zarathustra, in keeping with his mission, had to be different from that of the other great missionaries of humanity.
[ 12 ] Let us now recall what the individuality who incarnated in Zarathustra was allowed to do. He stood at such a high level of development that he was able to provide for the next cultural current after the ancient Persian, for Egyptian culture. Zarathustra had two disciples: the one individuality who later reappeared as the Egyptian Hermes, and the other who later reappeared as Moses. And when the two individualities were incarnated again in humanity for their further work, Zarathustra's astral body, which he had given as a sacrifice, was incorporated into Hermes. In the Egyptian Hermes we see a re-embodiment of the astral body of Zarathustra. Hermes carried within himself the astral body of Zarathustra, which was given to him so that everything that Zarathustra had absorbed in the outer world of science could be resurrected in the outer world. And the etheric body of Zarathustra was given to Moses; and because everything that develops in time is connected with the etheric body, when Moses became aware of the secrets of his etheric body, he was able to evoke the processes in time in great, powerful images, as they appear to us in Genesis. Thus Zarathustra continued to work through the power of his individuality, inaugurating and influencing Egyptian culture and that which was formed from it as ancient Hebrew culture.
[ 13 ] An individuality of this kind is destined for great things, also through its ego. The ego of Zarathustra incarnated itself again and again in other personalities. For an individuality that has come so far can always sanctify an astral body and strengthen an etheric body, even if it has given up the original ones. Thus, Zarathustra was also reborn and reappeared six hundred years before our era in ancient Chaldea as Zarathas or Nazarathos, who became the teacher of the Chaldean secret school as well as the teacher of Pythagoras and was able to gain great, powerful insights into the external world. If we put ourselves in the position of the Chaldeans with true understanding of their wisdom, which is not given to us by anthropology but by anthroposophy, then we get an idea of what Zarathustra was able to teach as Zarathas in the secret schools of the ancient Chaldeans.
[ 14 ] Everything Zarathustra could teach and bring to the world was aimed, as we have seen, at the outer world in order to bring order and harmony to it. Therefore, the art of forming and organizing empires, as befits the progress of humanity and what makes social order possible, was also the mission of Zarathustra. And that is why those who were among the disciples of Zarathustra can rightly be called not only great magicians, great initiates, but also always kings, that is, those who know the art of creating external social organization and order.
[ 15 ] An enormous attachment developed in the schools of the Chaldeans to the individuality — not to the personality — of Zarathustra. These wise men of the Orient felt akin to their great leader. They saw in him the Star of Humanity, for “Zoroaster” is a paraphrase of the word “gold star” or “star of splendor.” They saw in him a reflection of the sun itself. And from their deep wisdom it could not remain hidden from them when their master reappeared in Bethlehem. Then they were led by their star and brought him the outer signs of the best he had to give to mankind. The best that could be given to a person from the Zarathustra current was the knowledge of the external world, of the secrets of the cosmos, absorbed into the human astral body, into thinking, feeling and so that the Zarathustra disciples wanted to permeate their thinking, feeling and willing, the powers of their soul, with the wisdom that can be absorbed from the deep foundations of the divine spiritual world. For this knowledge, which can be acquired by absorbing the outer mysteries, they had as symbols gold, incense and myrrh: gold as a symbol of thinking, incense for piety, for that which permeates us as feeling, and myrrh for the power of will. Thus they showed their kinship with their Master when they appeared before him, as he was reborn in Bethlehem. Therefore the writer of the Gospel of Matthew actually tells us correctly how the wise men, among whom the Zarathustra had worked, knew that he had reappeared among men, and how they expressed their kinship to him by the three symbols—gold, frankincense, and myrrh—the symbols for the best that he had given them (Matthew 2,11).
[ 16 ] It was now a matter of the Zarathustra in the form of Jesus being able to work powerfully out of the Solomonic line of the Davidic family, in order to give everything back to humanity in a rejuvenated form that he had given to it earlier. To do this, he had to combine all the power that he had possessed before. Therefore, He could not be born at first into a body that came from the priestly line of the house of David, but only into one from the royal line. This expresses in the Gospel of Matthew the relationship of the name of the king in ancient Persia with the descent of that child in whom Zarathustra was incarnated. The ancient wisdom books of the Near East have always pointed to these events. Those who really understand these wisdom books read them differently than those who do not know the facts and therefore mix everything up. For example, in the Old Testament we have two prophecies, one in the Apocrypha of Enoch, which points more to the Nathanian Messiah from the priestly line, and one in the Psalms, which points to the Messiah from the royal line. Every single thing that is meant in the scriptures corresponds to the facts that we can obtain from the Akasha Chronicle. But Zarathustra now had to gather together all the individual forces that had once been within him. He had given up to Egyptian and ancient Hebrew culture - to Hermes and to Moses - what was in his astral body and in his etheric body. He had to reunite with this. He had to, as it were, retrieve the forces of his etheric body from Egypt. A deep secret is revealed to us here: Jesus, the Zarathustra in the flesh, of the Solomonic line of the House of David, must be led to Egypt, and he is led there. There he finds the forces that had gone out from his astral and etheric bodies, and which he had first given to Hermes and then to Moses. Because he had an influence on Egyptian culture, he had to bring back, as it were, the powers he had given there. That is why there was the “flight into Egypt” and what happened spiritually, the absorption of all the powers that he now needed to give back to humanity in a rejuvenated form, with renewed strength, what he had given it in the past.
[ 17 ] Thus we see how the Jesus of Bethlehem, whose parents were therefore formerly resident in Bethlehem, is correctly described by Matthew. Only Luke tells us that the parents of his Jesus were resident in Nazareth, that they went to Bethlehem for the census and that in this short time Luke's Jesus was born there, after which the parents returned to Nazareth. In the Gospel of Matthew, it is only indicated that Jesus was born in Bethlehem and that he had to be taken to Egypt. It was only after their return from Egypt that his parents settled in Nazareth, in order to be close to Jesus, who is the reincarnated Zarathustra, the one who represents the other current, Buddhism. This is how the two worldviews are brought together in concrete terms.
[ 18 ] Where the Gospels go to great depths, they show us in all depth what it is all about. What is more closely connected with will and power in human beings, with the royal element, if we may use the term technically, was known by those who knew the secrets of existence to be transmitted in the paternal element in the outward inheritance. But what is connected with the inner element, with wisdom and inner mobility of mind, is transmitted through the maternal element. Goethe, who looked so deeply into the secrets of existence, indicates this connection in the words:
From my father I have the stature,
The serious conduct of life,
From my mother the cheerful nature
And the desire to tell stories
[ 19 ] — a truth that you can find confirmed so often in the world. The stature, the outer form, what is directly expressed in the outer form, and “the serious conduct of life,” which is connected with the character of the ego, that man inherits from the paternal element. Therefore, the Jesus of Solomon inherited strength above all from the paternal element, because it was always His mission to bring into the world that which is surrounded by the radiance of the divine powers in space. The author of the Gospel of Matthew expresses this as magnificently as it can be expressed. That a special individuality will embody, that is proclaimed from the spiritual world as a momentous event, and it is not proclaimed to Mary, but to the father, Joseph (Matthew 1, 20-21). The deepest truths are hidden behind all this; one should not take it as something random. The Jesus of the Nathanic line inherited the inner qualities that were inherited from the mother. Therefore, the Jesus of Luke's Gospel had to be proclaimed to the mother, and we also see the proclamation to the mother taking place in Luke's Gospel (Luke 1:26-38). This is how deeply the facts are expressed in the religious scriptures. But let us continue.
[ 20 ] All the other facts that are described also express something significant. First of all, the forerunner of Jesus of Nazareth in the person of John the Baptist is to arise for humanity. Only in the course of time can we become more closely involved with the Baptist's individuality. Let us first accept him as he appears in the picture, as he has to proclaim what is to come in Jesus. He proclaims it by combining with an infinitely strong power everything that lay in the outer law, everything that lay in the old proclamation. The Baptist wanted to remind people of what was written in the law, what had become old in culture, what people had forgotten, but what was ripe and what people no longer paid attention to. Above all, he had to have the strength of a soul that is born ripe into the world. He is born of an old couple, is born in such a way that his astral body is pure and purified from the very beginning in the face of all the forces that pull man down, because passion and desire do not play a part in the old couple. This, in turn, is a profound wisdom that is hinted at in the Gospel of Luke (Luke 1:18). The great Mother Lodge of Humanity also takes care of such individuality. Where the great Manu directs and guides the processes in the spiritual, the currents are sent where they are needed. Such an ego as that of John the Baptist is born into a body directly under the guidance and direction of the great Mother Lodge of Humanity, the center of earthly spiritual life. The I of John the Baptist came from the same place as the being of soul for the child Jesus in St. Luke's Gospel. The only difference is that more of those qualities were given to Jesus that had not yet been penetrated by the ego, that is, a young soul is directed to where the reborn Adam is to be incarnated.
[ 21 ] It will seem strange to you that a soul could be directed from the great Mother Lodge to a place without an actual developed ego. For the same self, which is basically withheld from the Jesus of Luke's Gospel, is bestowed upon the body of John the Baptist, and these two, what lives as a soul being in the Jesus of Luke's Gospel and what lives as a self in John the Baptist, are in an inner relationship from the very beginning. When the human germ develops in the mother's womb, the I unites with the other limbs of the human organization in the third week, but it only gradually comes into effect in the last months before birth. Only then does the I become an inward, moving force. For in a normal case, where the I works in the usual way to bring the human germ to movement, we are dealing with an I that comes from earlier incarnations and brings the human germ to movement. But here, with John, we are dealing with an I that is connected with the soul being of Jesus of Nazareth. Therefore, in the Gospel of Luke, the mother of Jesus must go to the mother of John the Baptist when she is in her sixth month of pregnancy, and what is otherwise stimulated by one's own ego in one's own personality is stimulated here by the other fruit of the womb. The child of Elizabeth begins to move when the woman who carries the child Jesus approaches her, for it is the I through which the child is stimulated in the other mother (Luke 1:39-44). So deep is the connection between the one who was to work to bring about the confluence of the two spiritual currents and the one who was to announce him.
[ 22 ] Thus we see how, at the beginning of our era, something truly extraordinary is indeed taking place. If people usually like to have the truth simple, it is because of human laziness, which does not like to have to grasp many concepts; but the greatest truths can only be grasped through the greatest efforts of the mind. If a person must make the greatest efforts to describe a machine, then he should not demand that the greatest truths should also be the simplest. Truth is great and therefore complicated, and we must exert our mental powers if we want to gradually understand the truths related to the event of Palestine. Let no one indulge in the objection that things are presented in too complicated a way; they are presented as they are, and they are as they are because we are dealing with the greatest fact in the evolution of the earth.
[ 23 ] Thus we see two children of Jesus growing up, once the son of the Nathan parents Joseph and Mary, and we see this son being born of a young mother - in Hebrew the word Alma would have been used for this -; because that which was to work as a young soul had to be born of a very young mother. With this son, the parents lived again in Nazareth after returning from Bethlehem. They had no other children. It was reserved for the mother to be the only mother of this Jesus. Then we have the Jesus of the parents Joseph and Mary from the Solomonic line. After these parents had returned from Egypt and moved to Nazareth, they had a number of children, who you will find listed in the Gospel of Mark: Simon, Judas, Joses, James and also two sisters (Mark 6, 3). — The two children of Jesus grow up. The child who carries the Zarathustra individuality within him gradually develops, with an enormously rapid maturing, those powers that must develop when such a mighty individuality is active in the body. The individuality that is active in the body of the other Jesus is of a different kind. The most important thing about it is the Nirmanakaya of the Buddha. This is something that rests in this child. That is why we are told when the parents return from Jerusalem: “The child is full of wisdom” — that is, in his etheric body it is permeated with wisdom — “and the grace of God is upon him” (Luke 2:40). But he grew up in such a way that he developed the ordinary human qualities, which relate to understanding and recognizing the outer world, extremely slowly. A trivial person would have called this child Jesus a “relatively retarded child” if he had only looked at the powers of understanding and comprehending the outer world. But in this child, precisely, there developed that which streamed down from the Nirmanakaya of Buddha, which overshadowed him. A depth of inwardness developed that cannot be compared with any other inwardness in the world. A depth of feeling developed in the boy that had an extraordinary effect on his entire environment. Thus we see a being of deep feeling growing up in the Jesus of Nazareth, and we see an individuality of tremendous maturity, with a deep understanding of the world, growing up in the Jesus of Solomon.
[ 24 ] Now the mother of the Jesus of Nazareth, that child of deep feeling, had been told something significant. Already when Simeon stood before the newborn child and saw him radiant with the glory of him whom he had once been unable to see in India as Buddha, he foretold the great and mighty deed that was now to be accomplished; but he also spoke the great, significant words of the “sword that should pierce the mother's heart” (Luke 2:35). This word also refers to something we want to understand today.
[ 25 ] In the immediate neighborhood and under the friendly relations of the parents, the two children grew up and developed both approximately up to their twelfth year. When the twelfth year of Jesus of Nazareth approached, his parents went to Jerusalem, as was said, according to custom, to attend the Easter festival, and they took the child with them, as was the custom when children reached maturity. Now, in the Gospel of Luke, there is an extraordinarily mysterious account of Jesus at twelve years old in the temple. It says: When the parents returned from the festival, they suddenly missed the boy, and when they could not find him among the traveling company, they went back and found him in the temple, in the midst of the great teachers, astonishing everyone with his wisdom (Luke 2:41-50).
[ 26 ] What had happened there? Let us ask the imperishable Akasha Chronicle about it. The facts of the world are not that simple. What happened here also happens in the world in a different way. It happens that an individuality at a certain stage of development needs different conditions than those given to it from the beginning. Therefore it happens again and again that a person grows up to a certain age – and then suddenly faints and is as dead. Then a transformation takes place: his own ego leaves him, and another ego takes its place in his corporeality. Such a rearrangement of the ego also takes place in other cases; this is a phenomenon known to every occultist. Here, with the twelve-year-old Jesus, the following had happened: the ego entity, which until then had used the body of Jesus from the royal line of David's family as a Zarathustra ego entity to rise to the height of its time, emerged from the body of the Solomonic Jesus-child and transferred itself to the Nathanic Jesus, who therefore appeared as if transformed. His parents did not recognize him, they did not understand his words. For now the Zarathustra ego spoke through the Nathanian Jesus, which had been transferred to him. That was the moment when the Nirmanakaya of the Buddha united with the excreted astral womb, and that was also the moment when the Zarathustra ego united with the Nathanian Jesus. Now the Zarathustra ego lived in the Nathanian Jesus. And this child, who was so transformed that his parents could not understand him, they now took home.
[ 27 ] In the not too distant future, the mother of this child Jesus died, so that this child, in whom the Zarathustra ego now dwelled, was orphaned on the mother's side. We shall see that the fact that this mother died and left the child orphaned points to an especially profound connection. — The other child could not live on under ordinary circumstances after the Zarathustra ego had left him. Joseph of the Solomonic line had already died earlier, and the mother of the Solomonic child Jesus, with her children James, Joses, Judas, Simon and the two daughters, was taken in by the Nathanian Joseph, so that now Zarathustra was living again with the family into which he had incarnated himself, except for the father. In this way the two families have merged into one, and so the mother of the brothers and sisters—we can call them brothers and sisters, because in terms of the I they are brothers and sisters—lives in the house of Joseph of Nazareth with Jesus, who, however, was physically at home in Nazareth, according to his hometown. So he lived with them.
[ 28 ] Thus we see in concrete form the confluence of Buddhism and Zoroastrianism. For that body in which the mature ego-soul of Zarathustra was, could absorb and unite with itself what had been accomplished by the Nirmanakaya of the Buddha absorbing the astral mother-shell of the Nathanic Jesus. Thus we see an individuality growing up in Jesus of Nazareth, which bears within itself the I-ness of Zarathustra, which is irradiated and spiritualized by the rejuvenated Nirmanakaya of Buddha. What the confluence of Buddhism and Zoroastrianism is, we see living in this way in the soul of Jesus of Nazareth. Since Joseph of the Nathanic line also died, and relatively early at that, the Zarathustra child is actually an orphan; it feels orphaned. It is not what it is according to its physical descent. In spirit, it is the resurrected Zarathustra. According to its physical descent, its father is Joseph of the Nathanic line, and according to outward appearance, the world had to take it for that. Luke tells us exactly, and we must take his words exactly:
"And it came to pass, that, when all the people were baptized, that Jesus also was baptized, and prayed that heaven might be opened. And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove, and a voice came out of heaven, saying, Thou art my beloved Son, this day have I begotten thee. And Jesus himself began to work when he was about thirty years old...
[ 29 ] and now it is not just said that he is a son of Joseph, but it says:
[ 30 ] “...and was thought to be the son of Joseph” (Luke 3:21-23), because the I had originally incarnated in the Solomon-like Jesus and therefore had basically nothing to do with the Nathan-like Joseph.
[ 31 ] Now we have before us a unified being in Jesus of Nazareth, who had a great and powerful inner life in which everything we recognize as the blessings of Buddhism and everything we recognize as the blessings of Zarathustrianism was united. This inwardness was destined for greater and mightier things. Something quite different had to happen to it than to those whom John baptized in the Jordan. And we shall see that later on this inwardness had to receive the individuality of the Christ in the Jordan. Then the immortal part of the original mother of the Nathanian Jesus descended again and transformed the mother who had been taken into the house of the ° Nathanian Joseph, making her a virgin again, so that the soul of that mother, which Jesus had lost, was given back to him at the baptism of John. This mother, who remained with him, thus contains within herself the soul of his original mother, who is called Mary, the blessed, in the Bible (Luke 1:28).