[email protected] 805-875-5153

Who are you mr judah

0 Comments
Spread the love

Who are you mr judah

Judah is a character who throughout the history of Christianity causes a lot of fear, superstition, and disgust. His very name became a household name, synonymous with a curse. When someone needs to be branded and demonized, not only Christians, but also Communists, resort to this name.

The evangelical apostles present us with the story of Judah with a specific purpose. Judas from the pages of the Gospel is not the Judas that the apostles knew in life, this is not so much a person as a figure appearing in the Gospel to fulfill a specific purpose. The figure is nontrivial, rich and paradoxical, worthy of reflection.

Archpriest Dimitry Sizonenko and Alexander Sekatsky reflect on Judas.

Archpriest Dimitri Sizonenko: The paradox of the act of Judas is that, betraying Christ, he fulfilled the Scriptures, the will of God. Christ could have been captured just like that, could have been betrayed by any other person. But it was Judas, His close friend who was chosen.

Judah measures the world in market coordinates, he is well aware that everything is for sale and everything is bought. And the problem is this, and not that he is a thief. There are things that can not be sold, they can be obtained only as a gift, and the gift is undeserved.

All the figures in the Gospel of John are certain functions, each of them plays a special role. Who is Judas? He is the only apostle to whom Christ refers to the word "friend." At the same time, paradoxically, in the episode where Peter confesses Christ to the Son of God and then begins to argue with Him, Christ says: "Get away from me, Satan."

Alexander Sekatsky: There were so many executioners, monsters, tormentors in the world who completely lost their human appearance, but we continue to consider Judas the worst criminal. It is very important to dot all the "i". If a person loses his human appearance, then he approaches the inhuman, to the elements. After all, we do not blame the plague or death. Where we are approaching the extrahuman, transpersonal point, there is no corpus delicti in the obvious sense. Not because of human weakness, but absolutely consciously committed this betrayal, the betrayal of the dearest. Someone had to fulfill this mission, otherwise the triumph of God would not have been accomplished.

In one of his short stories, Borges says that it is possible to read God's plan in such a way that the second coming will take place when all the sins of the world are exhausted, when the whole continuum of evil is fulfilled. The worst sin has already been committed by Judas. Judas did not simply win the friendship of Jesus and share his wanderings with him. He knew Who Jesus was, that He was for the world, and yet betrayed.

Nietzsche in “Zarathustra” has such a chapter – “The Most ugly man”, translated by Antonovsky. When Zarathustra collects human exhibits for his cave, he meets this same ugly person and talks with him. And Judas gives an excuse for his betrayal, which must be analyzed:

Suddenly, the dead desert was heard by hissing and wheezing sounds rising from the earth itself, just as the water hissed and wheezed in a clogged water pipe at night. Finally, these sounds formed into a human voice and human speech, and so it read: “Zarathustra, Zarathustra, solve my riddle, say what revenge is to the witness” …

But he had to die, he saw with the eyes that everyone saw. He saw the depths and abysses of man, all his hidden shame and ugliness. His compassion knew no shame, he penetrated into my dirtiest nooks and crannies. This curious, overbearing, over-compassionate had to die. He always saw me; I wanted to take revenge on such a witness or not live myself. God, who saw everything, not excluding man, this God was to die. A person cannot stand such a witness to live.

What does it mean to be all-seeing in this sense? It means being all-understanding and ready for forgiveness and forgiveness. If you have a friend, a mentor, a teacher who is universal in the sense of condescension, it means that he sees all your weaknesses, sins, retreats, he sees all the clay from which you were created. We want to seem our neighbor better than we really are. So that everyone believes that this is you, the real one. But God knows everything, no matter how much you puff, no matter how much you puff out your cheeks. He shows condescension to all weaknesses and contempt for all manifestations of pride. He is universal in the sense that no psychoanalyst has ever dreamed of. And that is scary.

Those close to us forgive us in slippers, in an altered state of consciousness, and in shame. But the fact is that this witness will always know and remember mistakes. And at some point it is necessary to throw off this yoke of understanding. Maybe if this witness is not there, then my weaknesses, my petty betrayals will disappear …

I would draw a parallel with Nabokov's Lolita, where Humbert Humbert chooses this teenage girl and starts taking care of her, trying to be everything for her. It is easy to be someone specific, a parent or husband, an assistant or a teacher. Doing absolutely everything for Lolita, he thinks that she should be grateful to him, as God. But at some point, Lolita betrays him, choosing not a young youth for himself, but another – moreover, a peer of Humbert himself.

In the fetishism of the ideal image and the elimination of witnesses, we were not able to do to the end the work of thought, the work of presence, the work of faith. The penultimate truth in almost everything is similar to the latter, but differs only in one thing – the opposite sign. As Zarathustra says: "I would reject compassion for man and contrast creation with compassion." It is necessary to overcome the last fear that you will be remembered and attributed to something. That is why the case of Judah is so radically important.

So said the ugliest man. Zarathustra got up and was about to leave, for he was shivering to the bone. You are ineffable, he said. You warned me of your way. In gratitude for this I praise you my way.

Archpriest Dimitri Sizonenko: “The Gospel of Nietzsche” sheds light on this amazing story and helps to see some things in more relief. Sin is not something that a person can remove by his own efforts, only God can take away this reality and return it to non-existence. In the Gospel of John, Judas is represented as the son of perdition. Every person blinded by resentment and anger can be saved. Peter will also be blinded at some point. But it is impossible to save that which is death itself.

At the Last Supper, Judas leaves because Satan entered. When Judah went out, it was night, and for Christ this was the approach of death. The Evangelist John says that Judas was so from the very beginning, therefore there is no justification and explanation for his act. Evil has no justification; it comes from non-existence and goes into non-existence.

Alexander Sekatsky: If the Lord sees what people really are in their hectic everyday life, why is it necessary for them to suffer torment and death? Death to Jesus is not terrible, He has risen and lives, but betrayal is indelible. The ability to cope with your inner Judas is foreseen for a person in much the same way as free will.

Archpriest Dimitri Sizonenko: The infernality of the situation is that God can simply be rejected, as many do. But when you’re not just rejecting, but selling for money, for some ridiculous ransom, it’s absolute vileness.

Questions from the audience:

Are there any exceptions to salvation? After all, Judas is a man, does this mean that he will someday be saved?

Archpriest Dimitri Sizonenko: The first thing that I would put out of the box: the problem of Judah is not just a problem of betrayal. Will Judas be forgiven like fallen angels or not? Judas, as the son of darkness and darkness, is in pitch darkness. Judas, like Peter, passes through betrayal, only Judas “mixed up” the tree. He hanged himself on an aspen, and he needed to hang on the neck of Christ. There was originally darkness in Judah; it ended up in the night. Where I came from. Cain's figure is largely symmetrical to Judas.

What would happen if Judas came to his senses and did not commit treason? And why did his betrayal happen through a kiss, a sign of love, friendship?

Archpriest Dimitri Sizonenko: Christ would have been seized anyway, the price would have been set anyway. There were many who wanted to do this and there were enough suitable situations.

Alexander Sekatsky: I also always wondered why it was a kiss. I had a completely ridiculous parallel with a cowboy joke, where Bill tried to explain to John which of the racing riders saved his life. They were all so alike in identical hats. Then he grabs a gun, shoots and says that the one who fell, and saved my life yesterday. And Judas says that the one I kiss will betray him … It is absurd to the point of absurdity. Cain had even the slightest basis for resentment, and Judas was in absolute trust with Christ. In the world, no spiritual tradition knows such an image of absolute betrayal as the image of Judah.

Original lecture

Prepared by Alexander Kistanova
Photo: Rome Shagapov

Subscribe to the Predaniya.ru channel on Telegram so as not to miss interesting news and articles!

Join us on the Yandex.Zen channel!


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *