Edward Martin interview on Coast to Coast AM

This is the Coast to Coast AM show (In four parts) hosted by George Noory, and with guest Edward T Martin, a researcher in the life of Jesus, having travelled extensively to do his research on the subject. Date of show: Sunday 22nd September 2002.

Recap:

What really happened to Jesus Christ during the missing years in his life, from the age of 12 to 30? Edward Martin, maverick researcher and explorer, traveled to remote locations in India, Nepal, and elsewhere in Central Asia, in search of answers to the mysteries of Jesus’ lost years. Edward Martin is the author of a book entitled King of Travellers, Jesus' lost years in India. Very soon, the author will also feature on the film of Paul Davids, Jesus in India. His book can be obtained here.

Part 1:

Part 2:

Part 3:



Part 4:

Did Jesus want to start a new religion?

Every scholar who decides to follow Jesus in his journey through Asia and study his life –From Palestine to Egypt, to Afghanistan, into India and Tibet- would quickly realize that Jesus, while teaching, was not just addressing people of Hebrew origin or Jews like himself; he was actually addressing every human being who came to listen to what he had to say and that includes people of all religions, of all races, of all colours …..

My own study of great spiritual teachers like Jesus, like Siddhartha Gautama, like Sathya Sai Baba, has made me realize that enlightened teachers do not think in term of ‘mine’ and ‘theirs’, but always in term of ‘ours’…meaning that over and above their own condition, they are more concerned with the good of humanity and the world as a whole, not just with part of humanity, for those who claim they are Hindus, Christians, Muslims or Buddhists…etc……Becoming enlightened, for me, means becoming aware of one’s true nature…That one is not just associated with the physical body which serves as one’s vehicle everywhere in life, but that one is also –and more importantly- part of the universal body of God…..People who are stuck with the issue ‘This is Mine, this is My religion, this is My culture….’ are actually still far from having understood the truth that Jesus came to teach us two thousand years ago…This is just petty-mindedness and it is clear that Jesus wanted us to evolve from that kind of mentality.

To support this idea, I will now refer to someone that I’ve just discovered recently. His name is Daniel Meurois-Givaudan. He is a French writer, now established in Quebec where he continues to work tirelessly with spreading his own knowledge of Jesus’ life and teachings. How does he know Jesus? Not just through the study of scriptures like we do, but he also has a special talent. In his early twenties, he once had an authentic out-of-body experience…. He discovered that he could actually leave his physical body and explore time and space……This is how he managed to rediscover his own past lives and his own relationship with the being we know as Jesus. I’ll bring more information on Daniel in articles to come….But if you want to know more about him, you can start reading here.

This is how Daniel would answer the present issue I am dealing with now. In one of his conferences in 2004, entitled ‘The first teachings of Christ’, this is what he had to say on the subject. I will quote three extracts from this conference which sum up what I’ve just stated here.

I Crucifixion and Post-Crucifixion message of Christ

“Jesus studied and practised a certain number of disciplines, not only in Palestine in the midst of the Essene Brotherhood of Carmel, but also in Egypt, in India, in the Himalayas. In fact, when he was 14 years of age, as soon as he left Carmel Mount and that all the religious formalities were completed, he went on a first journey by boat to the south of Great Britain, in Cornwall with his uncle Joseph of Arimathea, during about a year and a half. There, he familiarized himself with the Celtic culture and assimilated it.

Then, he went through Egypt, made a great trip by the route which brought him into India where he lived many years. He went through Tibet where he also lived many years. We have stayed with Anne Givaudan and other people as well in a monastery of the Himalayas in 1981, and we were lucky (because we had a beautiful letter of reference from a very great Lama) to sleep in the cell of a Lama, and while discussing with the chiefs of this monastery, they certified that they had manuscripts written and signed by the hands of Jesus himself, proving that he had stayed in Ladhak for several years. It is not the same monastery as we can find today because it’s been rebuilt, but it’s the same ecclesiastical order. Therefore, there are indeed traces of his passage, that he has not only taught there, but that he was also taught there. We will come back to what he has assimilated during that period of his life.

Then he stayed in India for several years, more precisely in the city of Puri, which is on the coast of Bengal, in the south of Calcutta. We can even say that he did his first serious preach there, because he taught a lot in the midst of the Brahmins, but he went even further than their freedom of conscience would allow them, which means that, at a certain period, the Indian society, which was very strongly structured on the basis of caste, wanted to eliminate Jesus; there has been an attempt on his life which he avoided just in time.

According to what he had told us himself –because sometimes, he also spoke to us, while we were together, of aspects of his life-, this attempt on his life has been extremely formative for him because it taught him that he had not come to do a work that should have political implications. Indeed he had tried to intervene in the Indian society to break the caste system there. We can note that two thousand years later, the same thing was tried by Gandhi and he has been killed.

It is as from this moment, Jesus told us, that he decided to keep things straight and to focus his mission essentially on the mystic aspect, even if it had some revolutionary aspects which would have some real repercussions on society.

II Did Jesus die on the cross?

As we explained in The way of the Essenes, Jesus did not die on the cross. There has been clinical death or N.D.E, but his return to life was nevertheless due to a complicity between certain factions of the Brothers of Heliopolis and certain Romans who agreed to pierce his side - but not the heart as some have claimed- in order to release the pleural liquid so that he can continue to breathe.

Indeed, crucified men would not die of their wounds but of suffocation. People thus believed that he had died but he had rather sunk in a coma. In the Gospels, one wants to make us believe that Jesus had lost so much blood that there was only water running out of his body… but that is false, the wounds did not bleed to this extent, and the water which came out of his body was the pleural liquid.

It must be noted that during the first centuries of Christianity, Christ was never represented crucified; he was shown in all his glory, only the finality of his work was shown, not the suffering, which was very different in term of thought. But, when he started being shown on the cross, he was shown, not with a wound on his heart, but on his left side as we can still see with a number of statues of Jesus on the cross.

Well then, as far as I can say, he survived from his wounds, but the aim was to make believe that he had died so that he could be removed as fast as possible from the cross. Now, it is clear that, to succeed, this also demanded a lot of his own capacity of regeneration, in the hours and the days that followed, to regain a lot of his strength. On the other hand, he also received help from the Essene healers.

All this did not take place like a plot; we simply wanted to save him because we thought that he shouldn’t die like this and that if he had a chance, it shouldn’t be missed. Indeed the crucifixion situation took place at a very high and mysterious level, but we soon realized, under the impulsion of Joseph of Arimathea, that we could not prevent this idea of resurrection which corresponded to the archetype that was very deeply rooted in the conscience of humanity.

In fact, during the first hours, we could argue as much as we can with people saying that he has not died, that he had simply regenerated and that we could see him, we quickly realized that people did not want to believe us, because for them, he had to be resurrected, it had to match with the great Osiris myth. If we consider all the great avatars of Vishnou, we will note that most of them had a death with resurrection. This happens because it is a model in the subconscious mind of humanity.

Therefore we realized that it was futile to try to explain the truth and that, finally, it would do a lot of good to people to believe that this resurrection on the physical level did indeed take place. It is possible that Jesus would have been capable of regenerating by himself completely, I am not saying otherwise, or trying to diminish his capacities, but the fact is that it took place like I just described.

I had the delightful joy of being there when he came out of the tomb, and then, he had to be literally charged on a horse because he was very much weakened, but if he managed to survive, it was essentially due to his yogic regenerating powers. Then, he continued to re-oxigenate himself for some few weeks, after that, there was that famous meeting at Emaus with Thomas, and many other apostles, and myself with them. He continued to give us his teachings and explained to us why it was useless to fight against this idea of resurrection. He also gave us guidance for the work to come, and repeating that there was no religion to create….because here, we were beginning to see that with such a great death, it would give an impulse to his message. It’s often the death of a great being that give the impetus to his message because it literally prints it in the collective conscience and gives a dynamic to his message.

At this moment, we saw that what we have worked for three years, even more for some, was beginning to bear fruits in an incredible manner, because so many things started being said about Jesus, and there were people who added things on top of that, pretending that they had saw Jesus coming out of the tomb and rise to heaven, etc….people became delirious in many ways. Even among those who were at his side and who respected him, there were some who were telling stories, to give more strength to the message they believed in. Some pretended they had seen him, touched him and even assisted to his resurrection and ascension, etc…

We try to stop that, but it eventually gave birth to many small schools of thought, which later gave birth to some gospels which we would qualify as apocryphal today.

Nevertheless, during that time, Jesus practically gave each one of us, a direction and saw to it that we kept that way and warning us not to transform his sensibility and thought into a religion. On this aspect, we have to admit that we failed completely….but I also think that it was inevitable and I am persuaded that, as far as possible, he tried to guide us in another way.

(Note that Daniel was called Simon at the time of Jesus and that he was from an Essene family, and from the age of 6, was placed in the monastery at Carmel where he received the initiation and formation as a healer.)

III The foundation of Christ revolution

“We will now see the major foundation of the teachings of Master Jesus. I have to say that he was not the first to elaborate on this teaching on Earth. 1500 years before him, the Pharaoh Akhenaten had also set the basis of this teaching in the collective conscience or in the collective subconscious mind.

Akhenaten started with the basis that there is only one God and that there was no need for any priest to communicate with this unique divinity, that each of us had the capacity to plunge directly into the divine, that each of us had access to the One whom, personally, I call the Big Boss!

But this idea has been further explained and with stronger force by Master Jesus, and we can even say that it’s the fundamental idea in his teachings: “Address yourself directly to your Father, you need no temple or priest!”….and he said this while respecting the temples and the priests, but his principle is that we all had, each and every one of us, access to the divine. It was a revolutionary idea and this is what disturbed the Pharisees who feared that they would lose their power if people learned that they could address themselves directly to God without going through the priest. It was the whole social edifice which was being shaken.

However the aim of Master Jesus was not to shake the society at that level but to send each one of us to his own self, by saying: “You are beautiful, noble, great and true enough to have inside access to the Father without having to go through someone else. Now, if you don’t feel ready, not strong enough, you can still turn to someone or go to pray in a temple, but the real temple is inside of you.”

Here, he was putting his finger on something which is really not well understood today by us, the human beings. He was putting his finger on the fact that there is fundamentally no difference between God and us. Of course, he did not say so to the mass because he would not have been understood, and it would have ended badly for him. But in the small circles of initiates who had the possibility to come closer to him, he compared each of us to the cell of a human being.

On this subject, we have the impression sometimes that we’ve discovered this notion of cell in modern time, but it existed since the earliest Antiquity, certain Greeks even spoke of the notion of atom, this is to say that the notion of the infinitely small has already existed on Earth for a very long time.

Master Jesus compared each one of us to a cell belonging to the Great Body that we could call God, and he said that we were not outside God, we were part of His Body, He is inside of us and we are inside of Him, there is no separation, no frontier. When we speak of God, we are already placing a boundary in between Him and us, meaning that we place him outside our conscience.

Master Jesus said that we, as incarnated humans, when we consider one of our cells, are in fact behaving just like God when He addresses to one of his own creatures, and the work of God through each of His own creatures is a work on Himself to make each of his own cells conscious of itself and conscious of being part of a Great Body called God.

And what is requested from us as human beings is the deification of every cell of our body (physical, ethereal, emotional, mental, etc…). What we should not do is to create division, fractures at all level of our being, of our reality. We should recreate the marriage between the subtle and the dense, between the divine and the human incarnated.”

(Extract from the 2004 seminary in Quebec entitled ‘The first teachings of Christ’)

This whole process of rediscovering the life and teachings of Jesus should therefore lead man to realize he needs to raise himself above this tribal mentality so common today in between people of the world, above this notion of ‘my religion’ v/s ‘your religion’, or even the idea of ‘superior’ and ‘inferior’ religions because truly, religion is merely the product of our human mind while spiritual enlightenment should in fact be the real focus in our evolution. What Jesus brought to us is wisdom, and wisdom can come from anywhere and from anyone; it doesn't have to be only from someone of my own race or religion; wisdom is universal...And Jesus is a universal master!

Bhavishya Purana

Bhavishya Mahapurana 115 AD

(Click on the photo for a clearer view)

One of the most cited documents by scholars (See Jeff Salz’s comment in previous video) who have interested themselves in the journey of Jesus to India is the Bhavishya Purana. This Purana (Meaning 'of ancient time' in sanskrit) is believed to be one of the eighteen Puranas written in sanskrit by Vedavyasa, the renowned sage, who, after having written the Mahabharatha, did not feel happy with its content, and decided to write the eighteen puranas to complement with wider explanation the philosophy of the Mahabharatha. While tradition stipulates that this Purana is indeed the work of Vedavysa, it is clear that this document contains texts written much later, with entries as late as the 19^th century. Some scholars have also gone to the extent of suggesting that 'Vedavyasa' is actually a title given to the most learned and unbiaised sage of every era. Generally speaking, scholars are of opinion that the basic text of the Bhavishya Purana could have been written over a period of two millennia from 2^rd to 3^th century AD with additions as late as 1850 AD.

The important thing is that this document is one which contains references to Christianity, and most importantly to Jesus as being 'Isha Putra' or ‘The Son of God’, and his arrival in Kashmir, India is clearly described in this respected work of Hindu culture. He meets with King Shalivana of Kashmir who welcomes him in his land.

[Bhavishya Purana: Pratisarga Parva, Chaturyuga Khanda Dvitiyadhyayah, 19th Chapter, Texts 17 to 32] Transliteration of Sanskrit text:

vikramaditya-pautrasca
pitr-rajyam grhitavan
jitva sakanduradharsams
cina-taittiridesajan

bahlikankamarupasca
romajankhurajanchhatan
tesam kosan-grhitva ca
danda-yogyanakarayat

sthapita tena maryada
mleccharyanam prthak-prthak
sindhusthanam iti jneyam
rastramaryasya cottamam

mlecchasthanam param sindhoh
krtam tena mahatmana
ekada tu sakadiso
himatungam samayayau

ekadaa tu shakadhisho
himatungari samaayayau
hunadeshasya madhye vai
giristhan purusam shubhano
dadarsha balaram raajaa

ko bharam iti tam praaha
su hovacha mudanvitah
iishaa purtagm maam viddhi
kumaarigarbha sambhavam

mleccha dharmasya vaktaram
satyavata paraayanam
iti srutva nrpa praaha
dharmah ko bhavato matah

shruto vaaca maharaja
prapte satyasya amkshaye
nirmaaryaade mlechadesh
mahiso 'ham samaagatah

mlecchasa sthaapito dharmo
mayaa tacchrnu bhuupate
maanasam nirmalam krtva
malam dehe subhaasbham

naiganam apamasthaya
japeta nirmalam param
nyayena satyavacasaa
manasyai kena manavah

dhyayena pujayedisham
suurya-mandala-samsthitam
acaloyam prabhuh sakshat-
athaa suuryacalah sada

isha muurtirt-dradi praptaa
nityashuddha sivamkari
ishamasihah iti ca
mama nama pratishthitam

iti shrutra sa bhuupale
natraa tam mlecchapujaam
sthaapayaamaasa tam tutra
mlecchasthaane hi daarune

svaraajyam praaptavaan raajaa
hayamedhan cikirat
rajyam krtva sa sasthyabdam
svarga lokamu paayayau

Here is an English translation of this passage (Quoted from Search for the historical Jesus by Prof. Fida Hassnain, pg 191):

“During this period, Shalivahana, grandson of Vikrama-Ditya, laid hold on the kingdom of his father. He defeated the invincible Sakas (Scythians), and fought off the hordes from Cheen (China), Balhika (Bactria), Kamrupa (Parthia), Tatari (Mongolia), Roma (Rome- more probably Greece) and Khura (Khorasan).

He took possession of their treasures, and those who deserved punishments were punished. He also demarcated the border between the Aryans and the Mleechas (Amlekites), fixing the Sindhu (River Indus) as the boundary between the two peoples.

During this period, the king of the Sakas came to Himatunga (Himalayas). In the mountain area near Wyien, the king saw a dignified person of white complexion wearing a long white robe. Astonished to see this foreigner, he asked, ‘Who are you?’ The dignified person replied in a pleasant manner:

“Know me as Ishwara Putram, (or ‘Son of God’), or Kanaya Garbham (‘Born of a virgin’). Being given to truth and penances, I preach the truth to the Amlekites.

After hearing this, the king was astonished. He asked: Which religion do you preach? The dignified person replied:

O king, I come from a land far away, where there is no truth, and evil knows no limits. I appeared in the country of the Amlekites. And I suffered at their hands.

I appeared as Isha Masiha,(or Jesus the Messiah). I received Messia-hood or Christhood.

I said unto them, ‘Remove all mental and bodily impurities. Recite the revealed prayer. Pray truthfully in the right manner. Obey the Law. Remember the name of our Lord God. Meditate upon him whose abode is in the centre of the sun.’

When I appeared in the Amlekite country, I taught love, truth and purity of heart. I asked human beings to serve the Lord. But I suffered at the hands of the wicked and the guilty.

In truth, O King, all power rests with the Lord, who is in the centre of the sun. And the elements, and the cosmos, and the sun, and the God, are eternal. Perfect, pure and blissful, God is always in my heart. Thus my name has been established as Isha Masih.

After having heard the pious words from the lips of this distinguished person, I felt peaceful, made obeisance to him and returned.”

In this document, we can find clear indication that the presence of Saint Isa, (Name also given to Jesus in Buddhist and Islamic texts) which we believe to be Jesus himself, has been noted in Kashmir and that he could indeed have come to India after surviving the ordeal of crucifixion. And traditions in India reveal that he came there and continued his ministry until his death.

Jesus’ appearance is described: he has a ‘golden’ complexion or fair complexion and wears white clothes, which is the colour worn by the Essenes in general (We will explain this in next articles). He says that he comes from the land of Mlechas- of the west therefore and that he is 'born of a virgin'. He says his name is Isha Putra, or Son of God. He is also called Isha Masihah, or Jesus the Messiah. And he describes the persecution he went through after he started teaching his own people. The name 'Isha' or 'Isa' is found in many cultures as referring to Jesus. In the Koran, Jesus is referred to as Isa. For the Buddhists, Jesus is called Isa. Sathya Sai Baba also affirms that Isa is the original name of Jesus. You can note how vital such a document can be in explaining the reasons for Jesus to come to India. Most probably, he could not stay in Palestine after being condemned there as a criminal by Roman authorities. The way to India is the most probable route he could have taken in an effort to leave Roman jurisdiction. It should also be noted that this region of Kashmir was already inhabited by a tribe of Jewish origin. Therefore Kashmir could have been elected as the new home of Jesus and he would still be among his own people there. We know, from Notovitch’s translation of scrolls found in Tibet, that Jesus already came to India before in his youth, and that he probably already knew this place and its people.

Jesus in the Himalayas

This is a 9 minutes rendition of a one hour documentary aired on Discovery Channel produced by Ian Cross and Bini Adams, with Jeff Salz as presentator, entitled Jesus in the Himalayas (2001) and tracing the path taken by Jesus during his lifetime to travel across India, into the Himalayas. Anthropologist Jeff Salz retraces the journey allegedly made by Jesus, from the Indian foothills along mountain passes as high as 17,000 feet, rafting down rivers towards the Tibetan border, following the trade routes of the biblical era.

Signs that show that Jesus didn't die on the cross!

Gustave Doré- Crucifixion

Time spent on the cross

First and foremost, you have to know that IT IS possible to survive from crucifixion. Although it was one of the most atrocious punishments inflicted on criminals in ancient times, there are known cases of people who survived the experience. The 1^st century Jewish historian Josephus reported (In the Life of Flavius Josephus) seeing three of his friends crucified, and after having appealed to the Roman commander Titus to free them, they were brought down from the cross and given medical attention. Two of them died eventually, but one of them survived.

With accounts of historians like Josephus, we know that criminals who were crucified had to be left on the cross for several days before they died. And death would occur because of exhaustion and suffocation, not because of their wounds. As time passes, the criminals, feeling exhausted, would have less strength to hold on their feet. Being held up in position only with their arms stretched, it would cause their lungs to be compressed, making it impossible to breathe properly until they suffocate. But in general, this would happen after two or three days. Sometimes, to hasten their death, the legs of the criminals would be broken very soon, making them suffocate immediately and die more quickly.

In the case of Jesus, the accounts of the canonical gospels themselves provide us with some information about how much time he spent on the cross. Many scholars believe that this time is not long enough to have caused death.

In Mark’s account, chapter 15, verse 25, we can read the following: “And it was the third hour, and they crucified him” (The third hour in Jewish time corresponds to 9 o’clock in the morning)

With verses 34 to 37, we read the following: “And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani which is, being interpreted, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?....... And one ran, and filling a sponge full of vinegar, put it on a reed, and gave him to drink, saying, Let be; let us see whether Elijah cometh to take him down.. And Jesus uttered a loud voice, and gave up the ghost.” (The ninth hour corresponds to 3 o’clock in the afternoon).

That would mean that he remained on the cross at least six hours before he appeared as dead to all. While some have suggested that people gave him a substance to drink with the vinegar, causing him to fall unconscious, it is clear that he spent only 6 hours on the cross.

With the other accounts of Mathew, Luke and John, we either note the same time spent on the cross or even less. But it is with John’s account that we have the shortest time:

“Now it was the Preparation of the passover: it was about the sixth hour. And he saith unto the Jews, Behold, your King!..... They therefore cried out, Away with [him], away with [him], crucify him! Pilate saith unto them, Shall I crucify your King? The chief priests answered, We have no king but Caesar. Then therefore he delivered him unto them to be crucified.”

(John 19:14 – 16)

In this account, the trial took place much later, at noon, which means that Jesus spent even less time on the cross according to this account. The next day was to be the Sabbath for the Jewish and the bodies of the criminals could not remain on the cross because of this.

“The Jews therefore, because it was the Preparation, that the bodies should not remain on the cross upon the sabbath (for the day of that sabbath was a high [day]), asked of Pilate that their legs might be broken, and [that] they might be taken away.”

(John 19:31)

The bodies of the crucified had therefore to be removed from the cross before the end of the day, and not surprisingly, the two other men who had been crucified along with Jesus were still alive. And their legs had to be broken to hasten their death. But in the case of Jesus, they apparently found him unconscious and thought that he was dead.

The blood flow

But one detail should strike the reader in the gospels’ accounts. In John 19:32 – 34, we read the following:

“The soldiers therefore came, and broke the legs of the first, and of the other that was crucified with him. But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead already, they broke not his legs. How be it one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and straightway there came out blood and water.”

If Jesus was already dead then, we might wonder why so much blood and water came out of his body when his side was pierced with the spear. This can only happen when his heart is still beating, even if, faintly. Blood stops circulating inside the body as from the moment the heart stops beating. In the case of Jesus, this is a clear proof that it hadn’t happen yet.

Another detail we should note is that Pilate himself, when asked if his disciples could take the body of Jesus, was surprised to hear that he had died so quickly. In Mark, chapter 15, verse 44:

“And Pilate marvelled if he was already dead: and calling unto him the centurion, he asked him whether he had been any while dead.” And the centurion reporting to him is the same who said earlier on: “Truly this man was the Son of God.” (Mark 15:39)

It is a noble man named Joseph of Arimathea who went to ask for the body of Jesus. It is said that he was a disciple of Jesus; he was a rich man and clearly had influence in Jerusalem, since he went directly to Pilate to ask for the body of Jesus.

“And when even was come, there came a rich man from Arimathea, named Joseph, who also himself was Jesus` disciple. This man went to Pilate, and asked for the body of Jesus. Then Pilate commanded it to be given up.” (Matthew 27:57-58)

If we read accounts of that period, we would learn that condemned men, under Roman rule, those who were crucified, had their bodies simply left in the desert to be devoured by wild beasts. They didn’t have the honor for being placed in a tomb anymore, unlike Jesus. The fact that Pilate authorized the body of Jesus to be taken by the disciples is probably a sign that Pilate himself had a certain degree of respect for Jesus.

We know of at least one letter of Pilate which testifies that. In one letter written to the Emperor Tiberius, Pilate talks of his admiration for Jesus, and even the protection he granted to him at times. An authenticated copy of this letter is found in the Library of Congress in Washington:

“A young man appeared in Galilee preaching with humility, a new law in the Name of the God that had sent Him. At first I was apprehensive that His design was to stir up the people against the Romans, but my fears were soon dispelled. Jesus of Nazareth spoke rather as a friend of the Romans than of the Jews. One day, I observed in the midst of a group of people a young man who was leaning against a tree, calmly addressing the multitude. I was told that his name was Jesus. This I could easily have suspected, so great was the difference between Him and those who were listening to Him. His golden coloured hair and His beard gave to His appearance a celestial aspect. He appeared to be about thirty years of age. Never have I seen a sweeter or more serene countenance. What a contrast between Him and His hearers with their black beards and tawny complexions. Unwilling to interrupt Him by my presence, I continued my walk but signified to my secretary to join the group and listen. Later, my secretary reported that never had he read in the words of all the philosophers, anything that compared to the teachings of Jesus. He told me that Jesus was neither seditious nor rebellious, so we extended to Him our protection. He was at liberty to act, to speak, to assemble, and to address the people. This unlimited freedom provoked the Jews - not the poor but the rich and powerful.

Later, I wrote to Jesus requesting an interview with Him at the Praetorium. He came. When the Nazarene made His appearance I was having a morning walk and as I faced Him my feet seemed fastened with an iron band to the marble pavement and I trembled in every limb, as a guilty culprit, though He was calm. For some time I stood admiring this extraordinary Man. There was nothing in Him that was repelling nor in His character, yet I felt awed in His presence. I told Him that there was a magnetic simplicity about Him and His personality that elevated Him far above the philosophers and teachers of His day. All in all He made a deep impression upon me and everyone because of His kindness, simplicity, humility and love.

Now, Noble Sovereign, these are the facts concerning Jesus of Nazareth and I have taken time to write you in detail concerning these matters. I say that such a man who could convert water into wine, change death into life, disease into health, calm the stormy seas, is not guilty of any criminal offence and as others have said, we must agree truly this is the Son of God!

Your most obedient servant,

PONTIUS PILATE”

The herbs brought by the disciples

In John’s account, we also learn that after the body of Jesus was taken away by Joseph, Nicodemus brought some herbs to the tomb:

“And there came also Nicodemus, he who at the first came to him by night, bringing a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about seventy-five pounds. So they took the body of Jesus, and bound it in linen cloths with the spices, as the custom of the Jews is to bury.” (John 19:39-40)

This famous mixture of myrrh and aloes has intrigued scholars a lot, since these were also healing herbs. These herbs had curative properties, and known to have been used by Romans and Greek as far as 300 BC for their healing properties. Myrrh could be used as anti-inflammatory and aloe could also be used to heal wounds. (Read here) Could these herbs have been used by the disciples themselves to heal Jesus’ wounds or at least start a treatment before putting him in the tomb? The tomb belonged to Joseph himself and it was very close to the crucifixion scene. (Read here as well). If Jesus was really dead, one may wonder why they needed so much herbs for him, because this is really an extravagant amount. In ancient medical treaties, it is known that a mixture of these two herbs could be a very effective remedy for wounds.

What might have happened inside the tomb

This is a question that has intrigued scholars for years. Should we accept the official version of the church and believe that Jesus was really dead on the cross, or do we consider all the signs that I’ve just enumerated? We know, according to gospels’ accounts that the tomb was guarded, at least most of the time, but some of the guards were very fearful of the signs that they saw around them in nature. Did they stay in post all the time?

Another point to note is that it was a new tomb, belonging to a disciple of Jesus. It could well have had a secret passage inside leading somewhere else, a secret passage allowing someone to reach Jesus while the tomb was closed from outside. In Luke 23:53, it is said:

“And he took it down, and wrapped it in a linen cloth, and laid him in a tomb that was hewn in stone, where never man had yet lain.” We know that Joseph of Arimathea was an influential and rich man. There is a possibility that he could have intervened himself.

But we don’t even have to stretch it that far to believe that Jesus was indeed not dead when he was put in the tomb. Notovitch account of Jesus’ life reveals to us, that during his stay among the Brahmin priests and yogis, he was taught a number of things, like healing wounds and restoring the human body. We know that he has always been a good healer, doing so many extraordinary feats in public. If he came out of his sleep, or coma while being in the tomb, he could have healed himself, even using the herbs that were there with him. Later, I will tell you of another possibility to explain his survival.

In all cases, there are numerous accounts that show that Jesus did not die on the cross, but continued to live hereafter for a long time, and died at an old age. But most of these accounts exist outside the Christian canon. For some very obvious reasons, they have been suppressed and ignored by the Church. That’s why most Christians have either never heard of them, or believe them to be rumours, when in fact some of these accounts are from texts that have very significant importance in other traditions….Like Hinduism, Buddhism and Islam.

The attitude of the Orthodox Christians has always been to treat these texts as heresies, and it would be hard to make them even look at some of these texts. These texts simply frighten many of them. It can be a difficult experience for people to learn that what you’ve been taught to believe throughout your life suddenly appears as not true. But if only they would dare to go outside tradition, they would see that there is even more to discover about Jesus, that the picture that is now being projected of him by the Church is an incomplete one, even a distorted one. The real Jesus was a far more impressive being than what orthodox Christians have been made to believe. People need to realize that, if indeed Jesus survived crucifixion and continued to live after that, he would have left the Roman jurisdiction at all cost to avoid further trouble with the Roman authorities. It would mean that we would probably find signs of his post-crucifixion life in texts elsewhere, texts outside the Judeo-Christian tradition, these precise texts that a Christian would never consider to study.

We realize that many of the dogmas defended by the Church were there simply to guarantee its authority. The resurrection of Jesus, after he himself raised Lazarus from his tomb, is the most extraordinary event on which the Church will insist to persuade the followers of his divinity. But a good Christian should not fear to learn the truth; he should accept it boldly just like the Master taught us two thousand years ago. And this truth will ultimately lead him into becoming more open-minded.

Resurrection V/S Reincarnation

There was a time when the Church would wildly defend the idea that the earth is flat until proven wrong by scientists. There was a time, as well, right in the middle of the 17^th century, when a fierce conflict broke, opposing scientists like Galileo and Church representatives, over the question of whether earth was revolving around the sun or not, and the church representatives would publicly state that the idea that the Sun is stationary is "foolish and absurd in philosophy, and formally heretical since it explicitly contradicts in many places the sense of Holy Scripture..."; while the Earth's movement was also considered as an heretical idea, contrary to theological 'truth'. Up to this day, it is still with the same persistence that they would defend the idea of the resurrection of Jesus and his bodily ascent to heaven, despite the fact that many of the church ministers, priests and bishops themselves have come to doubt the literal meaning of resurrection.

How can we know that Jesus did survive crucifixion and continued to live hereafter? Simply because there are evidences of his presence elsewhere after the time of crucifixion, and even a tomb in Srinagar, Kashmir, which many people believe to be his own. He did not die on the cross, and was probably found in a state of coma when removed from there. I will come to that issue in detail later.

Let me first deal with that question of bodily ascent of Christ. Every living creature dies; human beings, animals, and plants are all subjected to the same law of life and death. The only one in history of mankind to have escaped death, according to the Church, is Jesus! All prophets of the world have eventually died one day: Mohammed, Krishna, Siddharta Gautama, Rama, Mahavir, etc…..For the Church, Jesus is the only one who does not die because he is of divine essence. This gives Jesus divine authority on earth and also a supremacy over all other prophets and saints. Some would also say that this spectacular ‘miracle’ is the confirmation that his message is the one to be listened to among all others.

I will not try to diminish the value of his message by any means. Actually, what I am going to tell you in the rest of this article is not meant to undervalue his message in any way. For me, he is still the enlightened being with a mission to lead others to truth. But I hope you realize that this idea that Jesus rose from the dead can indeed have a negative effect in the mind set of those who share it, the Christians in general, even leading them to believe that other religions inspired by the ‘simple human beings and mortals’ can only be inferior compared to the true religion of Christ.

What I am trying to do here is to show to my readers the universality of world religions. If God, the unique God I believe in, is the inspiration behind the major religions of the world, then, it shouldn’t be a problem to reconcile the messages of their founders to mankind. But in the case of Christianity as it is, the concept of resurrection is a serious obstacle in achieving this. You will find now that Jesus himself has never taught this concept of resurrection to his disciples, that this is an idea that crept in among the early church fathers probably, but it ended up influencing the whole western world through the Christian churches.

Resurrection is a religious theory suggesting the possibility of human beings to rise again from death in their own body and flesh. In other words, dead people simply sleep until they are woken up for final judgement at the end of time. Reincarnation, on the other hand, is the idea that the soul migrates from one body to another, that when any living entity dies, its spirit or soul leaves the dead body and may enter a new body (That of a new-born entity).

With religions that predate Christianity, there is the belief that man is born again several times on earth and goes through the cycle of birth and death until he frees himself from the shackles of his mortal body. Hindus believe in rebirth, Buddhists as well believe in it. If you study the Bible closely, you will find that Jews as well, at the time of Jesus and before the time of Jesus, also believed in rebirth.

In Matthew, chapter 16, Verse 13-14, we can read the following:

“Now when Jesus came into the parts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Who do men say that the Son of man is? And they said, Some [say] John the Baptist; some, Elijah; and others, Jeremiah, or one of the prophets.”

(Read here as well)

In other words, they are suggesting that others around them thought that Jesus was Elijah, John the Baptist or Jeremiah born again. Why would they say such a thing if, in their time, around that period, there wasn’t the belief that man could be born again? You will note that Jesus himself doesn’t correct them in saying that.

It is true that the bible contains arguments against reincarnation and rebirth, but most of these arguments come in the writings of people living after crucifixion of Jesus. This belief in resurrection, bodily resurrection, seems to have appeared with the early church fathers, who had to explain to the mass, the disappearance of Jesus after he was raised from the dead, and therefore was born the idea of Jesus’ bodily ascent to heaven. It is very much possible that the close disciples of Jesus themselves had to come up with an explanation, and they simply could not reveal the truth to the rest of his followers because it could endanger the life of their master. It is possible that they themselves invented the idea that God, the Father, took back Jesus, his Son, in Heaven.

Resurrection is a concept that Paul would defend scrupulously in his letters afterwards. In Corinthians, Chapter 15, verses 12-14, he states:

‘Now if Christ is preached that he hath been raised from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there is no resurrection of the dead, neither hath Christ been raised: and if Christ hath not been raised, then is our preaching vain, your faith also is vain.’

It should be noted that Paul himself had never known Jesus personally and had never met Jesus himself. He became a follower after having a vision of him on his way to Damascus. And it happened after the crucifixion of Jesus. But nevertheless, it is the Pauline version of the story that has survived up to this day and is considered as the official version. It is the Pauline version of the story which is expressed in the four canonical gospels of the New Testament. If I had to choose in between who to follow, Jesus or Paul, I would choose Jesus!! Not Paul!! The church father, Iranaeus, in his treaty entitled ‘Against heresies’ in 178 AD stated that Christians believe in the resurrection of the Physical body, in the same way that Jesus himself resurrected in his body. Very soon, I will show you that Jesus, in fact, never died on the cross, but regained consciousness inside the tomb. And therefore, that the whole concept of resurrection is, in fact, a false doctrine propagated by the church fathers, when in reality, Jesus taught something else, more in line with the philosophy of the East: Karma and rebirth.

I will now quote a series of sayings attributed to Jesus in one gospel written by the apostle John himself……Yes! A gospel written by one of the 12 apostles of Jesus, and approved by the rest of the apostles…It does exist. It has been called the ‘Gospel of Holy Twelve’ by the translator of the text, the irish Rev. Ouseley. (Look here) I will present the details of the origin of this gospel in another article. For the time being, let me quote the appropriate sayings of Jesus to support this idea I am trying to convey here.

In the Hindu scripture, the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna, the God-incarnate states the following:

"Those who are envious and mischievous, who are the lowest among men, I perpetually cast into transmigration, into various demoniac species of life" (16,19). And also: "Those who worship me and surrender all their activities unto me, being devoted to me without hesitation, engaged in devotional service and meditating unto me, I deliver them quickly from the ocean of birth and death" (12,6-7).

In the Gospel as written by John, Jesus is reported as saying:

“As ye do unto others, so shall it be done to you. As ye give, so shall it be given unto you. As ye judge others, so shall ye be judged. As ye serve others, so. shall ye be served.
For God is just, and rewardeth every one according to their works. That which they sow they shall also reap.” Lection 18, verses 11-12

This is the law of Karma as taught by Krishna as well in the Bhagavad Gita. Christians who refute the idea of reincarnation or rebirth generally have no explanation to the fact that babies too can start suffering from their tender age, and they can be born blind or sick from birth. Orthodox Christians might tell us that these babies have not yet sinned themselves but they are suffering for the sins of their parents. Jesus’ statement on the contrary, provides a clear and logical explanation to the cause of suffering of mankind. We can only suffer because of our own deeds, not because of the deeds of our parents, grand-parents, etc….

Lection 24, verse 4, Jesus also states:

“And Iesus spake unto them of the law of love and the unity of all life in the one family of God. And he also said, As ye do in this life to your fellow creatures, so shall it be done to you in the life to come.”

Or Lection 34, verse 10,

‘For as ye have done in this life, so shall it be done unto you in the life to come.’

Newton’s third law states that for every action, there is an opposite and equal reaction. Science is also in line with the theory of Karma and rebirth as taught by Krishna and Jesus. Will the Church follow?

For a more in-depth discussion on the subject, read here

I'd like to quote someone on the same subject here:

"First you have to define the word "religion". If, by religion, you mean the teachings of the original founder of the religion, that is one question. If, by "religion," you mean what the current followers believe, that is a different question.

I'll start with the first question, and this is my opinion and conclusions after 30 years of study.

All of the founders of the world's major religions not only believed in reincarnation, but they could see it directly and had first-hand knowledge. It was not always prominent in their teachings. That depended on the spiritual needs of the people they were helping, on what they needed to understand, and what they could understand. Generally, it was something that was understood by the close followers and by followers who had studied the esoteric side of religion. Every religion has an esoteric side, a mystical branch. In the mystical branch of every religion, you will find reincarnation. It is not usually given great importance *in and of itself*, but it is important as it fits in with the overall scheme of things. Reincarnation is simply birth, life, and death, with the one addition that these things are assumed to be cyclical. So, in the larger picture, birth has its importance, no more. Life has its importance, death has its importance, and the state between lives has its own importance. Reincarnation simply says that these things repeat in cyclical fashion.

There are clear references to reincarnation in the version of the Christian New Testament that has come down to us. I think that origially there were more, but they were edited out. Reincarnation as a doctrine was taught by many of the early Church fathers until it, along with the doctrine of the pre-existence of the soul, was declared "anathema" by the Fifth General Counsel convened in 553 AD by Emperor Justinian, against the wishes of the Pope who boycotted the meeting. In the 13th century, a group of Christians called the Cathars in France were the first to be persecuted in the Inquisition, partly for their belief in reincarnation.

Meanwhile, the philosopher Plato taught reincarnation, but that portion of his teaching is not taken seriously by most philosophers today, even those who specialize in Plato. Perhaps they feel that he just had a "senior moment" when he taught that idea, and they forgive him for it.

Now, to the second question, what the modern-day followers of the religions believe. This is obviously going to be a matter of percentages. We know that 25% of Americans, for example, believe in reincarnation, but I don't know the statistical breakdown for Christians. However, I do know that some percentage of Christians do believe in reincarnation. Here is a sample web page:
http://www.savioroftheworld.net/reincarnation.htm

A large percentage of people who consider themselves to be Christians believe that the Bible teaches against reincarnation. First of all the Bible does not speak with one voice, nor is it one homogeneous work. It is a compilation of writings, not all of which agree. Some of it has been edited by well-meaning people trying to clarify something, or by people trying to promote a philosophical or political agenda. So in portions of the New Testament you can find clear indications of reincarnation; and in other portions, you can find clear pronouncements against it. What Christians who do not believe in reincarnation tend to do is to ignore the indications for reincarnation, and quote the sections against it.

However, you will find that most of the portions of the New Testament which teach against reincarnation were written by Paul. And most of the sections which show a clear indication for reincarnation are quoting Jesus or involve a story about the disciples asking Jesus a question.

So I think if there is a discrepancy, I would prefer to trust what Jesus said than what Paul said.

To see an example of the New Testament where reincarnation is clearly referred to, look at John 9:1. There, the disciples are asking Jesus a question. They obviously have been debating amongst themselves, about the reason that a man was born blind. They put to Jesus the two most likely explanations: 1) that the man sinned, or 2) that his parents sinned.

Since the man was born blind, if he sinned to cause the blindness, it would have to have been before he was born. Since we cannot assume that the disciples were so stupid as to believe that a fetus can sin to such a degree as to deserve to be born blind, there is no alternative except that the disciples gave the first explanation as that the man sinned in a previous lifetime.

The second explanation that the disciples gave to Jesus was that the man's parents sinned. This is the traditional explanation. So in these two alternatives, the disciples are giving Jesus the esoteric explanation, and the traditional explanation.

Jesus answers that it was neither, it was for the glory of God to be manifest. This exchange is typical of a spiritual master and his disciples. Jesus was not refuting either answer, but he was taking the question to a higher level, in my opinion. His exact meaning is open to interpretation. Either the man chose to be born blind before he incarnated; or this is a philosophical answer about the nature of suffering, that the end-result is to glorify God when suffering is handled properly. But the answer does not refute either alternative explanation offered.

Therefore, Jesus had the clear opportunity to refute reincarnation, and He didn't do so. This means that reincarnation was taken for granted by the disciples in their intimate conversations with Jesus.

However, we know from the New Testament that Jesus spoke openly with the disciples, but did not speak to the masses without using parables.

Consider this parable, taken from the Gospel of Thomas, which is from the Nag Hammadi documents, paragraph #109:

--------
Jesus said, "The kingdom is like a man who had a hidden treasure in his field without knowing it. And after he died, he left it to his son. The son did not know (about the treasure). He inherited the field and sold it. And the one who bought it went plowing and found the treasure. He began to lend money at interest to whomever he wished." (Thomas O. Lambdin translation)
---------------
Here, the treasure is the soul within, and the knowledge of the soul within, which is one with God. The field is the body and the field of experiences in this physical world.

Dying and leaving it to his son means, reincarnating. In the next incarnation he also does not know about the soul within. Selling the field means incarnating again.

Finally, in this next incarnation, the man begins "plowing". Plowing means, to search within oneself for the truth, for the answers to one's questions.

This man who plows, finds the treasure, the direct knowledge of the soul within, which he finds is in and one with God, or Existence itself.

Once he has that experiential knowledge, he begins teaching others. "Lending money with interest" means giving others this treasure, and "with interest" means that when these people have gained this knowledge, they in turn teach others.

So in my opinion this is a sample of Jesus's original teachings about reincarnation, put in parable form to prevent people who weren't ready for it from understanding it.

That parable still works, by the way. People who are ready to understand it, get the meaning immediately. People who aren't ready for it never believe my explanation.

Indeed, life is not meaningless, except in our imagination and dulled perception. Life is so full of meaning that it would overwhelm you if you got a glimpse of it. It is so full of meaning that people who are awakened to the presence of God may look at one small object and be absorbed in the deep meaning of just that small thing for hours. Life is also a supreme adventure, a great quest, and that quest has tremendous meaning. Any suffering we experience is a challenge, an opportunity to be courageous and bring out the best in oneself. A study of the reports of people who have had near-death experiences is instructive. They tell us just how meaningful life is, and what is really important.

I hope this helped answer your questions.

Best regards,
Stephen S."

If there is reincarnation, there is reincarnation for everyone. It's not based upon beliefs of people. If it is true for a Hindu or a Buddhist, it is also true for a Christian, a Jew or a Muslim. If reincarnation is real, then it is real for everyone. If it is real, then it is not real according to beliefs of people, but it would be a law of the universe. For me, it's just like the Copernicus' theories of heliocentrism being rejected by the Church in the past. One day, eventually, humanity will have to realise that the teachings of the great masters as they know it, have been significantly distorted over time by those who had the power to do it.