أن تكتشف في النهاية أن شخصيتك المفضلة هي "يهوذا".

Προσωπική εξομολόγηση; Αλληγορία πολιτική; Πνευματικό μανιφέστο; Ευαγγελική ανάπλαση; Εκκλησιαστική εναντίωση; Ένα συνονθύλευμα όλων αυτών· ένα από τα πιο σύνθετα και κορυφαία έργα του Καζαντζάκη.

Ο Καζαντζάκης περιγράφει μυθιστορηματικά την πορεία του Ιησού, ακολουθώντας και αναπλάθοντας τα γεγονότα όπως εκείνα εξιστορούνται στα ευαγγελικά κείμενα, προς τη σταύρωση, αποτυπώνει μυθιστορηματικά τη ζωή και τα πάθη του Θεανθρώπου, προσδίδοντάς τους νατουραλιστική υπόσταση. Επικά και βιβλικά στοιχεία αναμοχλεύονται με κοινωνικές και πολιτικές αξίες/ιδέες, οι έννοιες της θεότητας και του αγώνα ταυτίζονται, ενώ υπέρτατο ιδανικό αναδεικνύεται το σύμβολο του ανθρώπου που διώκεται και βασανίζεται, που θυσιάζεται και αγωνίζεται υπέρ της Ελευθερίας και του ίδιου του Ανθρώπου. Στον πυρήνα της πλοκής βρίσκεται ο δυισμός της καζαντζακικής σκέψης· η πάλη ανάμεσα στο σώμα και την ψυχή, ανάμεσα στη θνητή και την αθάνατη φύση.

Αγωνία μεγάλη· αγαπούσα το σώμα μου, και δεν ήθελα να χαθεί· αγαπούσα την ψυχή μου, και δεν ήθελα να ξεπέσει· μαχόμουν να φιλιώσω τις δυο αυτές αντίδρομες κοσμογονικές δυνάμες, να νιώσουν πως δεν είναι οχτροί, είναι συνεργάτες, και να χαρούν, να χαρώ κι εγώ μαζί τους την αρμονία.

هي الرواية التي لابد أن تُقرأ على مهل،لا لشئ إلا لأنها تخاطب الروح، والروح تطالب الشئ بهدوء لكي تتذوقه بما يستحق.

عيسى: كلمة الله وروحه ألقاها في رحم إمرأة عذراء وهي سيدة النساء مريم بنت عمران، لتصبح هي ومولدها آية للعالمين، عيسى : النبي الأكثر تأثيرًا وتغييرًا في حياة البشر من حيث عدد أتباع ملته وكم التأثيرات المهولة التي تسببت به عقيدته ، وكل ذلك وقد مات وصلب (تبعا لعقيدة المسيحين) أو رُفع للإله (تبعا لديانة المسلمين) ، أي أنه انتهى من على الأرض وهو صغير السن ، ولكنه كان عظيم الأثر.

{تِلْكَ الرُّسُلُ فَضَّلْنَا بَعْضَهُمْ عَلَى بَعْضٍ مِّنْهُم مَّن كَلَّمَ اللّهُ وَرَفَعَ بَعْضَهُمْ دَرَجَاتٍ وَآتَيْنَا عِيسَى ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ الْبَيِّنَاتِ وَأَيَّدْنَاهُ بِرُوحِ الْقُدُسِ وَلَوْ شَاء اللّهُ مَا اقْتَتَلَ الَّذِينَ مِن بَعْدِهِم مِّن بَعْدِ مَا جَاءتْهُمُ الْبَيِّنَاتُ وَلَـكِنِ اخْتَلَفُواْ فَمِنْهُم مَّنْ آمَنَ وَمِنْهُم مَّن كَفَرَ وَلَوْ شَاء اللّهُ مَا اقْتَتَلُواْ وَلَـكِنَّ اللّهَ يَفْعَلُ مَا يُرِيدُ }، نبي كان مولده معجزة، وحياته مليئةبالكفارح والعبرة، وحارب كل ذلك بالحب، فالله محبة.

رواية من أعظم ما يكون، فيها الإيمان النابع من القلب والحب الصادق للكتابة، فأتت معجزة أدبية بليغة، صوّر فيها كازنتزاكيس حياة المسيح بصورة إنسانية بالغة الرقة والعذوبة، رواية كُتبت بالقلب ومن القلب فوصلت إلى القلب، رواية عن رحلة الإنسان للتضحية، رواية عن ألم الأم وخذلان الصديق وعظمة الرسول، رواية عن المسيح عيسى ابن مريم.

14-12-2015

‏ خدای قادر متعال،
متاسفم که دیگر به تو باور ندارم،
اما آیا خودت کتاب‌های *کازانتراکیس‌ را خوانده‌ای؟

Kazantzakis at his best! This book is simply a master class of storytelling that shows why this author is one of the very few true masters of narrative.

This book has raised great controversy among the Christian and particularly the Catholic Church and devotees. However the way faith driven men and women interpret this book's message is a good indicator of those who read the scriptures and those who study the scriptures. The book frightens the God-fearing people who are intimidated by a portrayal of Christ as a man and his life with all that comes with the human condition yet reaches divinity.

-----------Here be spoilers-------------

Now those who truly take in this books message understand that Kazantzakis proposes that Christ's true sacrifice for mankind was not the slashes, thorns and nails, but to renounce to be a man who loves, has children and grows old. When Christ realizes that his death in the cross is necessary for the salvation of humanity, he begs to be taken back and effectively taking the life of his sons as well as his own. Physical pain is endured everyday by regular men and women; this book proposes a sacrifice that is truly beyond human.

This book (along with its film adaptation) is infamously controversial. That's the one thing I knew about it before reading it. I speculated upon its possible blasphemies: might it propose a conspiracy between Jesus and his followers to fake Jesus's death and resurrection? Or connect dots between Christianity and Eastern mystical traditions? Or even place Jesus in a sexual relationship with one of his female groupies?

But the most surprising thing about this book is its utterly devout attitude toward the life of Jesus. In his introduction, Kazantzakis writes:

This book is not a biography; it is the confession of every man who struggles. In publishing it I have fulfilled my duty, the duty of a person who struggled much, was much embittered in his life, and had many hopes. I am certain that every free man who reads this book, so filled as it is with love, will more than ever before, better than ever before, love Christ.

It is the author's express purpose to bring peace, not a sword. Peace, not division. So what is it about this book that has reaped such controversy?

No doubt much of it is due to Kazantzakis's wild speculations (though "embellishments" seems a much more fitting word). In the opening pages, we see Jesus as a youth living in his workshop, where he sometimes constructs crosses on which the Romans crucify their political adversaries. He was conceived when his mother Mary smelled a pure white lily; his father Joseph lies paralyzed after he was struck by lightning from heaven on his marriage day, having never touched his wife.

These embellishments, along with the impeccably well wrought prose, the kind of prose that makes you think you're reading poetry, have won this book a place on my favorites shelf. It's a book that should be read by believers and nonbelievers alike.

"What business do you have here? Why weren't you crucified? Coward! Deserter! Traitor! Was that all you accomplished? Have you no shame? I lift my fist and ask you: Why, why weren't you crucified?"

A fantastic novel made famous/infamous by the American Taliban's vehement and often violent protesting of its film version, "Last" is a stunning, beautiful, vehement, and emotionally violent look at the greatest What-If? of all.
But the titular last temptation, what if Christ decided to climb down off the cross and lead the life of man, not God--is merely the very end of the book. Most of the novel is taken up with Christ's psychological turmoil and inner struggles with God and what his mission is supposed to be exactly, describing the inconsistencies and wishy-washiness that all messiahs must face. All that leads up the the "last temptation".
But, more than that: this is the story of Jesus and Judas which evolves gradually from "I will assassinate you" to love. It is certainly not an attempt to rehabilitate Judas, because Kazantzakis' beautiful betrayal was supposed to happen (like Snape vs Dumbledore, an obvious rip-off):

Judas asked, "If you had to betray your master, would you do it?"
Jesus reflected for a long time. Finally, he said, "No, I do not think I would be able to. That is why God pitied me and gave me the easier task: to be crucified."

نيكوس كازنتاكيس لا يكتب ....هو إنسان في رحلة بحث عن اليقين......عن الدين الحق....عن الإله.....
الكتابة بالنسبة اليه ليست وسيلة إبداع ...هي هاجس وجودي ....
ربما تكون رواياته طويلة...مملة في أسلوب كتابتها.مليئة بتفاصيل صغيرة ...ولن يستسيغها الجميع بسهولة...لكنها بلا شك ستترك فيك أثرها الذي لن يمحي بسهولة ..

"Рекао си љубав, и ослободио све анђеле и демоне што спавају у утроби човековој; није то, као што мислиш, проста, мирна реч; у њој је много крви, много војски што се сатиру, и градова што горе. Реке крви, реке суза, изобличило се лице земље; колико ти драго сад дери грло и вичи: 'Нисам то хтео да кажем, није то љубав, не убијајте се, сви смо ми браћа, станите!' Никако да стану, несрећниче! Сад је готово!"

Казанцакисов Грк имена Зорба осветлио ми је пут ка интересовању и за друга дела свог аутора. И нема ту много о чему са се пише, Казанцакис је дефинитивно фантастичан аутор, његова дела су давно прерасла потребу да се на насловницу ставља епитет бестселер и постала класици највише категорије. По природи нисам фанатично омађијан религијом, коју схватам као извор филозофије живота, извор мудрости и постизања душевног склада, али и начина окупљања људи. Из тог антифанатичног поимања религије научио сам да волим и туђе обичаје, посебно источњачке културе, коју одликује, гле чуда, потпуна посвећеност идеји која се граничи са фанатизмом. Зато је мени и било нешто теже да се одлучим да читам једну чисто религиозну књигу, требао је да се појави неко као Зорба и да ми је препоручи. Иако је Исус неко ко самим својим животом носи снажну мисао, мисао коју ми је даривао Зорба јаче струји кроз мене. Зорбина филозофија живота, Зорбин идеја која се провлачи кроз књигу јача је од Исусове поруке коју нам Казанцакис даје кроз Последње искушење. Или ако ћемо строго књижевно, дело Грк Зорба је и квалитетније и оригиналније дело од Последњег искушења.
Последње искушење представља поново испричану библијску причу о Исусу Назарећанину, његовом животу, постанку мита, његовим следбеницима, противницима, неверницима и савременицима. Али та прича је прилагођена савременом тренутку, дати су фиктивни дијалози, сусрети су наново испричани, ликови су уобличени и дато је, као предлог, објашњење настанка хришћанства, које се ослања на васкрсење, на почетак после краја, на ново рођење. Оно што је мени прво пало на ум након читања књиге је, како би ми као друштво прихватили Исуса да нам се сада појави са својим проповедима о загробном животу, божјим идеалима и свим, да се неко не увреди, тим причама препуним фантазије и нонсенса као у каквој дечјој бајци? Сматрам да му савремено друштво и савремени идеали не би дали ни толико шанси колико је добио од својих библијских џелата, али не би био разапет, више институционализован. Исус у делу и није најјачи лик, то је дефинитивно Јуда Искариотски, он је темељ уметничког квалитета ове књиге, он је носилац карактера, чврстина и темељ због кога ова књига има потребну снагу. Дело ми је на тренутке било и досадно, тема је веома позната, Исус је у својим ставовима пр��више сведен на догму у коју никако не треба сумњати, а ја сумњам и у самог себе, и не подносим ингениозне ликове пуне себе, који само тврде а ништа на увид не дају. Ипак како се конац делу ближи красота је све већа, чврстина Исусова бива све већа, имагинација и оригиналност Казанцакисове мисли се помаљају и дело добија на квалитету. Уобличавају се мисли и круг се затвара, а коначно склапање круга добија одлике човечности, Исус у агонији постаје оно што и треба, један од нас, онај који сумња, онај који је на Искушењу живота, из Исуса помаља се Зорбина лепота мисли и Казанцакисова оригиналност. Васкрсење доноси наду, уноси кључ у загонетку живота, Кантов догматски дремеж бива прекинут и претвара се у сумњу и индивидуалност, често на границама бласфемије, а Грк ни овога пута није далеко од савршенства.

"Велика је нужда, да би се спасио свет, да будеш разапет, и ја ћу да те разапнем, хтео то то или не; нужно је да васкрснеш, и ја ћу да те васкрснем хтео ти то или не; па ти седи овде у овом сеоцету и прави колевке и корита за децу. Натераћу ја, да знаш, ваздух да прими твој облик, венац од трња, ексере, крв; све је ушло у машинерију спасења, не може се више без тога. И небројене очи, до краја света, дизаће се и гледаће те разапетог у ваздуху; плакаће, и плач ће прочишћавати њихове душе од сваког греха... Али трећег дана ћу да те васкрснем; јер без васкрсења нема спасења. Последњи, најгрозоморнији непријатељ јесте смрт, оповргнућу је, како? Васкрснућу те, Исусе, сине Божји, Месијо!"

I loved this book! It puzzles me deeply why some Christians didn't like it. Perhaps a statement such as "Christ is both fully divine and fully human" can sometimes sound fine to people as an idea, but we don't want to think through what that means in actuality. We still want to think of Christ as 100% divine and maybe 10, maybe 20% human. Heaven forbid that he be actually, you know, human!

I was raised Catholic, but was in my high school religious exploration phase, and was actually Buddhist at the time I encountered this book and Kazantzakis' other masterpiece Zorba the Greek. This book had the effect of pulling me back towards Christianity, a pull I still feel today, because it opened up to me a deep connection with the character of Christ. And because Kazantzakis' struggles with Buddhism resonated with me, his theme of being torn between a life of contemplation and renunciation on the one hand, and one of action, usefulness, and industry on the other. This is also the central choice Jesus makes in the book. Should he be a man or should he become the Christ? Is life's meaning in the doing, in daily accomplishments, politics, struggles, successes? Or is it to be found in ideas, pure thought and ideals, spiritual contemplation, and renunciation?

This question of Kazantzakis which runs throughout his work, came to him in the context of the Greek civil war, to which some of dearest friends were giving their lives at the time he wrote. I can see the young man he was then, someone not much older than I at the time of my high school searchings, and torn between choices for his own life.

Paradoxically Jesus' ultimate choice, though an act of renunciation on the surface, caused the profoundest transformation of the universe possible, became the most important action anyone ever did. So thought and action through Christ become one choice.

I have a friend, Katharina, who feels that if she were Mary, if she were Jesus' mother, she would have wanted him to grow up to be a happy, normal, married, steady carpenter. That would be her wish for her son and for the whole universe. That worries me, and I can't get it out of my mind. You mean, you'd rather there have been no Christ in the history of the universe? So your son could have a normal life? Isn't his surpassing joy now in triumph not worth the cost? All of our joy and our salvation? No. Marriage, kids, mastery of his craft, daily bread, plain happiness, is what she would wish for her son. And I mean, who can look at The Pieta and not understand in some way that wish? What heartbreak could ever surpass that of this lone woman cradling the torn body of her first and favorite son?

So the dichotomy resonated with me in high school. At the time Buddhism seemed to call me into a life of contemplation and renunciation, and Christianity into full engagement with an active life. That may simply have been my misunderstanding of Buddhism, since Matthieu Ricard seems to feel empowered by his religion to establish clinics and schools all over the Himilayas. In fact, I'm just realizing this instant that both religions actually call us to both halves of the central question, both to the truest ideals and the most active of actual lives. At the time, though, it seemed very different.

To finish the story, in high school I eventually settled on Science and Atheism as my religion. It remained so until the latter half of my third decade, in which I was called back to Christianity, specifically this time to the Mormons (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints). Mormons don't have any great literature to their credit yet, at least not that I've found, I may be slandering someone by this statement. But the restored gospel itself has all the greatness required, and Kazantzakis' view matches the real and living person of Christ I find in it more closely than any other depiction of the paradoxical divine and human man.

It may just be that my fundamental way of understanding the world is through literature, and this novel speaks to me of the living Christ more clearly than sutras or scriptures can.

n  n  
nadult image sharing

Once again, I've destroyed my love for a book (although I do still like it). I first read The Last Temptation of Christ in '88, just before Martin Scorsese turned it into a movie, and I remember being blown away. Unfortunately, my literary concerns were different back then; the me who read The Last Temptation of Christ over the last couple of weeks doesn't match the me who read it twenty-two years ago.

I care more about consistency today. I care more about character, theme and message. And beautiful prose...it just doesn't dazzle me like it used to.

What I always loved about The Last Temptation of Christ was the way Nikos Kazantzakis gave us a mortal Jesus who struggled with his role as the Son of God. I loved that he was tempted by Lucifer and truly felt that temptation. I loved that he was so weak that he needed Judas, his friend and his strength, to betray him so he could be crucified and die for man's sins.

But that wasn't Kazantzakis' The Last Temptation of Christ -- that was Scorsese's. Kazantzakis' Jesus was bereft of free will. Sure Lucifer's temptations preyed on Jesus' mind, but the power of God's coercion mooted Lucifer's attempts to corrupt Jesus. Moreover, Jesus' weakness and Judas' strength were irrelevant. God's hand fated their outcomes, and what I thought was the transcendent power of men choosing divine sacrifices was nothing more than foreordained game play. They were God's pawns in a one-sided game that couldn't be lost, so the sacrifice that had made me love the novel for two decades was no sacrifice at all.

I wish it were otherwise. I wish I still loved Kazantzakis' version of The Last Temptation of Christ, and that his sensual prose -- wonderfully translated by P.A. Bien -- could overcome the annoying contradictions between Christ's words/thoughts and his actions. I wish the Jesus of the novel was the Jesus of the movie. But my wishes are and will remain unfulfilled.