Show #25 - Julius Caesar: Evil Dictator or Messiah for Humanity?

[Mike]

Found this site that gives a quote from G about Judas and the page #.

_http://www.greenearthfound.org/write/judas.html

Students and readers of Gurdjieff’s All and Everything no doubt recalled, as I did, that Gurdjieff had himself declared a very similar perspective on the story of Judas, calling him “not only the most faithful and devoted of all the near followers of Jesus Christ, but also, only thanks to his Reason and presence of mind, all the acts of this Sacred Individual (Jesus) could form that result…which was, during twenty centuries the source of nourishment and inspiration for the majority of them in their desolate existence and made it at least a little endurable.” (p. 740). Since Gurdjieff wrote his book in the 1940s, long before this Gospel of Judas, or any other of the by now extensive Gnostic texts had been re-discovered, this synchronicity confirms the notion that Gurdjieff was aware of and could draw on secret initiatory teachings and revelations that had not seen the light of day in almost two millennia.

Edit Added:
And another fuller quote:
_http://www.gurdjieff-legacy.org/40articles/Full/Judas_full.htm

This devoted and favorite Apostle initiated by Jesus Christ Himself was called 'Judas.'... Judas was not only the most faithful and devoted of all the near followers of Jesus Christ, but also, only thanks to his Reason and presence of mind all the acts of this Sacred Individual could form that result [of being] the source of nourishment and inspiration for the majority of them in their desolate existence and made it at least a little endurable.
[When at the Last Supper it was realized that more time was required to fulfill the sacred sacrament Almznoshinoo] Judas, now a Saint, leaped from his place and hurriedly said:

"I shall go and do everything in such a way that you should have the possibility of fulfilling this sacred preparation without hindrance, and meanwhile set to work at once."

Having said this, he approached Jesus Christ and having confidently spoken with Him a little and received His blessing, hurriedly left.

 

[Laura]

Found this site that gives a quote from G about Judas and the page #.

_http://www.greenearthfound.org/write/judas.html

Students and readers of Gurdjieff’s All and Everything no doubt recalled, as I did, that Gurdjieff had himself declared a very similar perspective on the story of Judas, calling him “not only the most faithful and devoted of all the near followers of Jesus Christ, but also, only thanks to his Reason and presence of mind, all the acts of this Sacred Individual (Jesus) could form that result…which was, during twenty centuries the source of nourishment and inspiration for the majority of them in their desolate existence and made it at least a little endurable.” (p. 740). Since Gurdjieff wrote his book in the 1940s, long before this Gospel of Judas, or any other of the by now extensive Gnostic texts had been re-discovered, this synchronicity confirms the notion that Gurdjieff was aware of and could draw on secret initiatory teachings and revelations that had not seen the light of day in almost two millennia.

The bolded part is what is important. Secret teachings, or variations of early Christian perspectives, doesn't make them historical truth, just what someone believed due to misinterpretation.

 

[Mike]

Figured I'd add the last thing I found about G's thoughts on Judas fwiw:

_http://gurdjieffdominican.com/Gurdjieff_Judas_christianity.htm

Gurdjieff - The Role of Judas

Extract from Witness / J.G. Bennett

There were many extraordinary talks with Gurdjieff at meals. Once he spoke of the Last Supper and the role of Judas. He spoke in a rather low voice to me.

He said that Judas was the best and closest friend of Jesus. Judas alone understood why Jesus was on earth. Judas had saved the work of Jesus from being destroyed, and by his action had made the life of humanity more or less tolerable for two thousand years. He then looked at me very intently, and said: “You know what I say of Judas and how differently the church teaches. Which do you believe is true?”

What was I to answer? I saw that I had accepted without self searching the account that Gurdjieff gives in Chapter 38, on Religion, of All and Everything. Now I was called upon to pronounce my own judgment.

The crowded dining-room disappeared, and it seemed as if Gurdjieff were leading me back through the centuries to the Jerusalem of A.D. 33. It seemed that I had been there before, but this was not at all important. I was strongly aware of the prodigious forces at work—good forces and evil forces at war. Judas was unmistakably on the side of the good forces. That was all that I needed to know. In a moment we were back in the flat and I was speaking to Gurdjieff.

“You are right. Judas was the friend of Jesus, and he was on the side of good.” Gurdjieff said in a low voice:
“I am pleased what you understand.” He was almost inaudible, and someone asked from the end of the table if he would repeat it. He said:

“I speak only for him. One day Mr. Bennett will give a conference on the Last Supper, and many people will be thankful to him.”

 

[RflctnOfU]

Regarding Beelzebubs Tales, keep in mind that the text itself is not to be understood in a literal sense. The words as a whole serve the function of a shell, or a protective barrier guarding the pith underneath, which in it's turn is also concealing a pithy substance, which ultimately is the goal. The tales are most certainly NOT historical fact.

Kris

edit: Great show so far!!

 

[Foxx]

Edit Added:
And another fuller quote:
_http://www.gurdjieff-legacy.org/40articles/Full/Judas_full.htm

<snip>

Yeah, that's the one I was thinking of. It starts on page 677 of the copy I'm looking at and continues on until page 681, the end of chapter 38.

Found this site that gives a quote from G about Judas and the page #.

_http://www.greenearthfound.org/write/judas.html

Students and readers of Gurdjieff’s All and Everything no doubt recalled, as I did, that Gurdjieff had himself declared a very similar perspective on the story of Judas, calling him “not only the most faithful and devoted of all the near followers of Jesus Christ, but also, only thanks to his Reason and presence of mind, all the acts of this Sacred Individual (Jesus) could form that result…which was, during twenty centuries the source of nourishment and inspiration for the majority of them in their desolate existence and made it at least a little endurable.” (p. 740). Since Gurdjieff wrote his book in the 1940s, long before this Gospel of Judas, or any other of the by now extensive Gnostic texts had been re-discovered, this synchronicity confirms the notion that Gurdjieff was aware of and could draw on secret initiatory teachings and revelations that had not seen the light of day in almost two millennia.

The bolded part is what is important. Secret teachings, or variations of early Christian perspectives, doesn't make them historical truth, just what someone believed due to misinterpretation.

So is the "Gospel of Judas" a hoax, or a misinterpretation, or something else? I hadn't heard about it until just now while searching around online.

Here's some info on the "Gospel of Judas", for reference:

_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Judas

A leather-bound Coptic language papyrus document that surfaced during the 1970s, near Beni Masar, Egypt,[2] was named the Codex Tchacos after an antiquities dealer, Frieda Nussberger-Tchacos, who became concerned about the deteriorating condition of the manuscript. First translated in the early 2000s, the codex contains text that appears to be from the late 2nd century AD,[3] and includes the self-titled "Gospel of Judas" (Euangelion Ioudas)[4] which claims to be the story of Jesus's death from the viewpoint of Judas.

The manuscript was radiocarbon dated "between the third and fourth century", according to Timothy Jull, a carbon-dating expert at the University of Arizona's physics center,[5] and described by the National Geographic as being from AD 280, plus or minus 60 years.

Today the manuscript is in over a thousand pieces, with many sections missing due to poor handling and storage. Some passages are only scattered words; others contain many lines. According to Rodolphe Kasser, the codex originally contained 31 pages, with writing on both sides; however, when it came to the market in 1999, only 13 pages remained. It is speculated that individual pages had been removed and sold.

Here's the PDF of the translation from National Geographic done in 2006 by Rodolphe Kasser, Marvin Meyer, and Gregor Wurst:

_http://www.nationalgeographic.com/lostgospel/_pdf/GospelofJudas.pdf

Here's a link to a compilation of references for the alleged gospel:

_http://www.gospels.net/judas/

A National Geographic article on the text:
_http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2006/05/judas-gospel/cockburn-text.html

This part sticks out to me, making me wonder about the alleged gospel's authenticity (or at least its alignment with the truth):

The text has entranced him, and no wonder. The opening line of the first page reads, "The secret account of the revelation that Jesus spoke in conversation with Judas Iscariot. . . .”

A link to a NY Times article claiming that the text was mistranslated, by April D. DeConick, a professor of Biblical studies at Rice University, the author of "The Thirteenth Apostle: What the Gospel of Judas Really Says.":
_http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/02/opinion/02iht-edeconick.1.8558749.html

 

[Laura]

So is the "Gospel of Judas" a hoax, or a misinterpretation, or something else? I hadn't heard about it until just now while searching around online.

You are asking the wrong questions.

There is so much information that leads to the answer that I can't write it in a post or give you a simple answer. Things aren't black or white.

You should have a good grasp of the history of the gospels and other religious writings, both canonical and non-canonical, before you can even approach the topic of how to interpret or analyze such a piece of writing. And then, the history of the types of people who were writing such things. Then an understanding of the times in which they were written. Then an understanding of the falsification of history and the ways it happens, both deliberate and accidental.

If you have been following the discussion about Caesar/Jesus, read the recommended books, then you are in a better position to understand that there were LOTS of gospels written by lots of different groups for many reasons, and most of them were based on a core event that was wrapped in local myths and events that were different from place to place. There was a LOT going on back then. Read Courtney's book; read Carotta; read Atwill. Each of them has a piece of the puzzle. But mainly, you'll have to wait for my next volumes of Secret History where I'll be untangling and laying out the various threads that tangled up to make this Gordian knot. It's going to take a good two volumes to do justice to this topic alone.

 

[Foxx]

So is the "Gospel of Judas" a hoax, or a misinterpretation, or something else? I hadn't heard about it until just now while searching around online.

You are asking the wrong questions.

There is so much information that leads to the answer that I can't write it in a post or give you a simple answer. Things aren't black or white.

You should have a good grasp of the history of the gospels and other religious writings, both canonical and non-canonical, before you can even approach the topic of how to interpret or analyze such a piece of writing. And then, the history of the types of people who were writing such things. Then an understanding of the times in which they were written. Then an understanding of the falsification of history and the ways it happens, both deliberate and accidental.

If you have been following the discussion about Caesar/Jesus, read the recommended books, then you are in a better position to understand that there were LOTS of gospels written by lots of different groups for many reasons, and most of them were based on a core event that was wrapped in local myths and events that were different from place to place. There was a LOT going on back then. Read Courtney's book; read Carotta; read Atwill. Each of them has a piece of the puzzle. But mainly, you'll have to wait for my next volumes of Secret History where I'll be untangling and laying out the various threads that tangled up to make this Gordian knot. It's going to take a good two volumes to do justice to this topic alone.

Thanks for clarifying (as much as can be done in a single post)! History definitely isn't my strong suit, as there's a lot of knowledge that I lack in the area, but I'll be reading your upcoming volumes for sure.

 

[Redrock12]

An incredible show!
Incredible and enlightening!
Julius Caesar has been restored to his rightful place in history as a true hero of humanity.
Laura et al, thank you for bringing us the truth through all of your hard work and diligent research.
Is there anything that has not been fabricated and distorted by the PTB?

 

[Olesya]

What an amazing show this was! Thank you all so much! The history just became alive for me. All of you told the story of that time in such way that I felt like I was there and saw it with my own eyes. The tribute to Julius Caesar given by Laura at the end of the show was so high spirited and so moving.

Laura said:

Julius Caesar made an effort almost entirely alone to shape legislations to undermine the pernicious prerogatives of that class and to built up a broader Roman citizenship. Caesar felt himself in power to do something and he tried to do it. To what extent he might have succeeded if he would ahve been given 20 more years can only be conjectured, but the fact that stands out from everything that's written about him is that when he had the power to do it, all he had laid the foundation in law to make a fairer government and to better the people. That's the bottom line.

[...]

The object for which man seeks power is shown when they had it. And that's the difference between the Caesar's life from the beginning to end and the life of nearly every other so-called hero of our history. Caesar never sought power by the slaughter of people nor by lying, nor by unlawful seizure and banishment of his political opponents, by violent or unlawful assumption of all power in his own person or perpetuation of it. Audacious as he was it was boldness governed and guided by respect of every form of law that was just and respectable. It was his intention, obviously, to rebuild the Republic of Rome without destroying it, beginning by efforts to remove it's tumors and it's barnacles, and then by adding great domains to his territory, but he found no help among the leaders to secure and maintain justice and fair laws, so he took the responsibility for himself. Assassination was his reward.

Was it a quote from some book? Thank you, once again. Great show!

 

[Laura]

Was it a quote from some book? Thank you, once again. Great show!

Yes. That great book Meager1 found on the images of Caesar which has a wonderful synopsis of his life. The guy got a few things wrong - like the identity of the Ptolemy who was responsible for the death of Pompey and a few other little things - but basically, he got it! That chapter is worth reading even if you aren't interested in his discussions of various busts and statues and stuff which is rather tedious.

 

[Olesya]

Was it a quote from some book? Thank you, once again. Great show!

Yes. That great book Meager1 found on the images of Caesar which has a wonderful synopsis of his life. The guy got a few things wrong - like the identity of the Ptolemy who was responsible for the death of Pompey and a few other little things - but basically, he got it! That chapter is worth reading even if you aren't interested in his discussions of various busts and statues and stuff which is rather tedious.

Thank you, Laura. I'll look into it. I just bought and started reading Et tu Judas? Then Fall Jesus! and began reading The Ancient City as well.

I would also like to add my observation that in comparison to the previous show on the topic of Julius Caesar, this time you, Laura, seemed to be more relaxed and others as well, and it greatly influenced the result, osit. The conversation had a great energy flow. Great sense of humor. It was really, really good. Thank you all again!

 

[anartist]

Yes, I very interesting show and follow up to last Sundays show.
I just happen to be rereading Vol 1 of the Secret History, and I am struck by the mention of the mythicization process.
And I wonder, not knocking Caesar at all, if some of his history was mythstified ( think 'mystified' with a lisp) and if there are any examples in the Caesars' story that follow the mythic theme?
It also occurs to me that if the story of Caesar is essentially true, that the natural folkloric myth making tendencies of people could have been "used" to create the second JC myth? Since Caesar was apparently popular among the oppressed, the "story" of Christ would have readily accepted, perhaps even seem as a homage to Caesar at the first.
What twisted web is weaved.

 

[SeekinTruth]

Another great show! Just got done listening to it a couple of hours ago. I hope you will be having another show on Caesar and especially what the result of his murder ended up being.

I'm now finished reading Courtney's Et tu Judas? Then Falls Jesus (read it right after finishing The Complete Works of Caesar). Now I'll be rereading the last chapter of HoM. I want to read Plutarch's Lives soon and Francesco Carotta's book.

 

[Drazen]

Great show indeed! I'm currently reading the Gallic Wars, The Ancient City and waiting for the ordered Freeman' Julius Caesar. It will take some longer time probably to finish these and go onto other recommended reading. I must say that I'm really enjoying the reading and listening about everything that is related to JC. It is also a great inspiration for me and I'm asking myself quite often recently - "Imagine just what we could DO if we overcome our fears?" Certainly, this forum is the best place for learning how to know thyself and many here are already progressing greatly.

Recent thread http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,31760.0.html has many important things put together and connected and it helped me a lot to better understand with what we are dealing exactly when it comes to our machine/mechanical behavior. It is very important to cleanse/balance the Emotional center.

Looking forward to another JC show! :)






.

 

[dantem]

I was listening to the show at the point where Laura mention the story of Caesar marrying Cornelia, the daughter of Cinna, and when he was nominated to be the next Priest of Jupiter (or maybe he was it for a few time)

In the wiki it stuck me that a Priest of Jupiter, or Flamen Dialis, had to follow so much 'restrictions' during his office, that it would be impossible for Caesar to be 'Caesar' if he ever had the chance to endure this high honor over his shoulders.(?!)

Just read under the 'Restrictions' paragraph in the wiki article, there are so many restrictions that it boggles the mind!

Julius Caesar was nominated to be Flamen Dialis in 84 BC. Many scholars think he was not installed, although it seems unlikely that the Romans would allow a nominee to wait years without inauguration. When Sulla returned to Italy in 82, he proscribed Caesar and stripped him of his priesthood (which implies that he had indeed been inaugurated). No successor was selected. During the vacancy that followed (c. 82 to c. 16 or later), the duties of the office were discharged by others.[26]

It was unlawful for him to be out of the city for a single night;[10] a regulation which seems to have been modified by Augustus, insofar that an absence of two nights was permitted;[11] and he was forbidden to sleep out of his own bed for three nights consecutively. Thus, it was impossible for him to undertake the government of a province. He might not mount or even touch a horse, touch iron, or look at an army marshalled outside the pomerium, or be elected to the consulship. Indeed, it would seem that originally he was altogether precluded from seeking or accepting any civil magistracy;[12] but this last prohibition was certainly not enforced in later times. The Flamen Dialis was required to wear certain unusual garments, such as the apex, a point-tipped hat, and a laena, a heavy wool cloak.

The object of these rules was clearly to make him literally Jovi adsiduum sacerdotem (the constant priest of Jove), to compel constant attention to the duties of the priesthood, and to leave him effectively without any temptation to neglect them. The origins of the following superstitions are not so clear, but there is speculation in Plutarch,[13] Festus,[14] and Pliny the Elder.[15]

He was not allowed to swear an oath,[16] nor to wear a ring nisi pervio et cass[clarification needed], that is, as they explain it, unless plain and without stones;[17] nor to strip himself naked in the open air, nor to go out without his proper head-dress, nor to have a knot in any part of his attire, nor to walk along a path over-canopied by vines. He might not touch flour, nor leaven, nor leavened bread, nor a dead body: he might not enter a burial place, but was not prevented from attending a funeral. He was forbidden either to touch or to name a dog, a she-goat, ivy, beans, or raw flesh. None but a free man might cut his hair; the clippings of which, together with the parings of his nails, were buried beneath a felix arbor. No one might sleep in his bed, the legs of which were smeared with fine clay; and it was unlawful to place a box containing sacrificial cakes in contact with the bedstead.

In the view of Dumézil, these prohibitions mark the Flamen Dialis as serving a heavenly god, with his attributes of absolute purity and freedom, but also wielder of lightning and kingship. Within in his scope of action there are the domains of political power and right, but not battle, which belongs to Mars. His solidarity with the king is reflected in that of his earthly counterpart, the rex, with the Flamen Dialis. Such a partnership has parallels in other Indo-European cultures, such as that of the Vedic rajan and his purohita and the ancient Irish rig and the chief druid.