What Yeshua Ga Notsri claimed. Bulgakov Encyclopedia (short) Yeshua ha-notsri

YESHUA HA-NOZRI

A character in the novel “The Master and Margarita”, going back to Jesus Christ of the Gospels. Bulgakov met the name “Yeshua Ga-Notsri” in Sergei Chevkin’s play “Yeshua Ganotsri. An impartial discovery of truth" (1922), and then checked it against the works of historians. Extracts from the book are preserved in the Bulgakov archive German philosopher Arthur Drews (1865-1935) “The Myth of Christ,” translated into Russian in 1924, which argued that in Hebrew the word “natzar” or “nazer” means “branch” or “branch”, and “Yeshua "or "Joshua" - "help to Yahweh" or "God's help." True, in his other work, “Denial of the Historicity of Jesus in the Past and Present,” which appeared in Russian in 1930, Drewe preferred a different etymology of the word “natzer” (another option is “notzer”) - “guard”, “shepherd” ", joining the opinion of the British biblical historian William Smith (1846-1894) that even before our era, among the Jews there was a sect of Nazarenes, or Nazarenes, who worshiped the cult god Jesus (Joshua, Yeshua) "ha-notzri", i.e. . "Guardian Jesus." The writer’s archive also preserves extracts from the book “The Life of Jesus Christ” (1873) by the English historian and theologian Bishop Frederick W. Farrar. If Drewe and other historians of the mythological school sought to prove that the nickname of Jesus Nazarene (Ha-Nozri) is not of a geographical nature and is in no way connected with the city of Nazareth, which, in their opinion, did not yet exist in Gospel times, then Farrar, one of the most prominent adherents historical school(see: Christianity), defended traditional etymology. From his book, Bulgakov learned that one of the names of Christ mentioned in the Talmud - Ha-Nozri means Nazarene. Farrar translated the Hebrew “Yeshua” somewhat differently than Drewe, “whose salvation is Jehovah.” The English historian connected the city of En-Sarid with Nazareth, which Bulgakov also mentioned, causing Pilate to see in a dream “the beggar from En-Sarid.” During interrogation by prosecutor I.G.-N. as place of birth wandering philosopher featured the city of Gamala, mentioned in the book French writer Henri Barbusse (1873-1935) "Jesus versus Christ." Extracts from this work, published in the USSR in 1928, are also preserved in the Bulgakov archive. Since there were different etymologies of the words “Yeshua” and “Ha-Notsri” that contradicted each other, Bulgakov did not in any way reveal the meaning of these names in the text of “The Master and Margarita”. Due to the incompleteness of the novel, the writer never stopped his final choice at one of two possible birthplaces of I. G.-N.

In the portrait of I. G.-N. Bulgakov took into account the following message from Farrar: “The Church of the first centuries of Christianity, being familiar with the elegant form in which the genius of pagan culture embodied his ideas about the young gods of Olympus, but also aware of the fatal depravity of the sensual image in it, apparently tried with particular persistence to free himself It was from this idolization of bodily qualities that she took as Isain’s ideal the image of a stricken and humiliated sufferer or David’s enthusiastic description of a despised and reviled man by people (Ex., LIII, 4; Ps., XXI, 7, 8, 16, 18). His beauty, says Clement of Alexandria, was in his soul, but in appearance he was thin. Justin the Philosopher describes him as a man without beauty, without glory, without honor. His body, says Origen, was small, ill-built and unattractive. “His body,” says Tertullian, “had no human beauty, the less heavenly splendor." The English historian also cites the opinion Greek philosopher II century Celsus, who made the tradition of the simplicity and ugliness of Christ the basis for denying His divine origin. At the same time, Farrar denied the error-based Latin translation Bible - Vulgate - statement that Christ, who healed many of leprosy, was himself a leper. The author of “The Master and Margarita” considered the early evidence about Christ’s appearance reliable, and made his I.G.-N. thin and homely with traces of physical violence on his face: the man who appeared before Pontius Pilate “was dressed in an old and torn blue tunic. His head was covered with a white bandage with a strap around his forehead, and his hands were tied behind his back. The man had a large bruise under his left eye and an abrasion with dried blood in the corner of his mouth. The man brought in looked at the procurator with anxious curiosity.” Bulgakov, unlike Farrar, strongly emphasizes that I.G.-N. - a man, not a God, which is why he is endowed with the most unattractive, unmemorable appearance. The English historian was convinced that Christ “could not have been in his appearance without the personal greatness of a prophet and high priest.” The author of “The Master and Margarita” took into account Farrar’s words that before being interrogated by the procurator, Jesus Christ was beaten twice. In one of the versions of the 1929 edition, I. G.-N. He directly asked Pilate: “Just don’t hit me too hard, otherwise they’ve already beaten me twice today...” After the beating, and even more so during the execution, Jesus’ appearance could not possibly contain signs of the greatness inherent in the prophet. On the cross at I. G.-N. rather ugly features appear in his appearance: “...The face of the hanged man was revealed, swollen from bites, with swollen eyes, an unrecognizable face,” and “his eyes, usually clear, were now cloudy.” External disgrace I. G.-N. contrasts with the beauty of his soul and the purity of his idea about the triumph of truth and good people(A evil people, in his opinion, does not exist), just as, according to the Christian theologian of the 2nd-3rd centuries. Clement of Alexandria, the spiritual beauty of Christ contrasts with his ordinary appearance.

In the image of I. G.-N. reflected the reasoning of the Jewish publicist Arkady Grigorievich (Abraham-Uriah) Kovner (1842-1909), whose polemic with Dostoevsky became widely known. Bulgakov was probably familiar with the book dedicated to Kovner by Leonid Petrovich Grossman (1888-1965) “Confession of a Jew” (M.-L., 1924). There, in particular, a letter from Kovner was quoted, written in 1908 and criticizing the reasoning of the writer Vasily Vasilyevich Rozanov (1856-1919) about the essence of Christianity. Kovner argued, turning to Rozanov: “There is no doubt that Christianity has played and is playing a huge role in the history of culture, but it seems to me that the personality of Christ has almost nothing to do with it. Not to mention the fact that the personality of Christ is more mythical than real, which many historians doubt his very existence, that Jewish history and literature do not even mention him, that Christ himself is not at all the founder of Christianity, since the latter formed into a religion and church only a few centuries after the birth of Christ - not to mention everything this, because Christ himself did not look at himself as the savior of the human race. Why do you and your associates (Merezhkovsky, Berdyaev, etc.) place Christ as the center of the world, the God-man, holy flesh, a monoflower, etc. This cannot be allowed? so that you and your relatives sincerely believe in all the miracles that are told in the Gospels, in the real, concrete resurrection of Christ. And if everything in the Gospel about miracles is allegorical, then where do you get the deification of a good, ideally pure person, such as, however, world history knows a lot? You never know good people died for your ideas and beliefs? How many of them suffered all sorts of torment in Egypt, India, Judea, Greece? In what way is Christ higher, more holy than all the martyrs? Why did he become a god-man?

As for the essence of Christ’s ideas, as far as they are expressed by the Gospel, his humility, his complacency, among the prophets, among the Brahmins, among the Stoics you will find more than one such complacent martyr. Why, again, is Christ alone the savior of humanity and the world?

Then none of you explains: what happened to the world before Christ? Humanity has somehow lived for how many millennia without Christ, but four-fifths of humanity live outside of Christianity, therefore, without Christ, without his redemption, i.e., not needing him at all. Are all the countless billions of people lost and doomed to destruction simply because they were born before the Savior Christ, or because they, having their own religion, their own prophets, their own ethics, do not recognize the divinity of Christ?

Finally, ninety-nine hundredths of Christians to this day have no idea about true, ideal Christianity, the source of which you consider Christ. After all, you know very well that all Christians in Europe and America are rather worshipers of Baal and Moloch than of the monoflower of Christ; that in Paris, London, Vienna, New York, St. Petersburg they still live, as the pagans lived before in Babylon, Nineveh, Rome and even Sodom... What results did holiness, light, God-manhood, the redemption of Christ give if his fans remain pagans still?

Have courage and answer clearly and categorically all these questions that torment unenlightened and doubting skeptics, and do not hide under expressionless and incomprehensible exclamations: divine cosmos, god-man, savior of the world, redeemer of humanity, monoflower, etc. Think about us , hungering and thirsting for righteousness, and speak to us in human language."

I.G.-N. Bulgakov speaks to Pilate in completely human language, and appears only in his human, and not divine, incarnation. All the gospel miracles and the resurrection remain outside the novel. I.G.-N. does not act as creator new religion. This role is destined for Matvey Levi, who “writes down incorrectly” for his teacher. And nineteen centuries later, even many of those who consider themselves Christians continue to remain in paganism. It is no coincidence that in the early editions of "The Master and Margarita" one of Orthodox priests organized a sale of church valuables right in the church, and another, Father Arkady Elladov, convinced Nikanor Ivanovich Bosogo and other arrested people to hand over their currency. Subsequently, these episodes were removed from the novel due to their obvious obscenity. I.G.-N. - this is Christ, cleared of mythological layers, good, pure man, who died for his belief that all people are good. And only Matthew Levi, a cruel man, as Pontius Pilate calls him, and who knows that “there will still be blood”, is able to found a church.

Bulgakov Encyclopedia. - Academician. 2009 .

See what "YESHUA HA-NOZRI" is in other dictionaries:

Yeshua Ha Nozri: Yeshua ha Nozri (ישוע הנוצרי), Yeshua of Nazareth is the reconstructed original form (back translation) of the gospel nickname of Jesus Christ (Greek Ἰησους Ναζαρηνος, Jesus the Nazarene). Yeshu (ha Nozri) character Toledot... ... Wikipedia

The central character of M.A. Bulgakov’s novel “The Master and Margarita” (1928-1940). The image of Jesus Christ appears on the first pages of the novel in a conversation between two interlocutors on the Patriarch’s Ponds, one of whom, the young poet Ivan Bezdomny, composed... ... Literary heroes

This term has other meanings, see Yeshua Ha Nozri. Yeshua, nicknamed Ha Nozri (Hebrew: ישוע הנוצרי) ... Wikipedia

Ga Notsri is one of the heroes of Mikhail Bulgakov’s novel “The Master and Margarita”. Is an alternative version of Jesus Christ holy scripture interpretation. The uncensored version of the Babylonian Talmud mentions a preacher named Hebrew. ‎יש ו‎… … Wikipedia

Yeshua Ga Notsri is one of the heroes of Mikhail Bulgakov’s novel “The Master and Margarita”. It is an analogue of Jesus Christ in an alternative interpretation to the Holy Scriptures. The uncensored version of the Babylonian Talmud mentions a preacher named Hebrew. ‎יש… … Wikipedia

A world religion that unites followers of the teachings of Jesus Christ as set out in the New Testament, the four Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John), the Acts of the Apostles and some others sacred texts. Holy book X. admits... ... Bulgakov Encyclopedia

Novel. During Bulgakov's lifetime it was not completed and was not published. For the first time: Moscow, 1966, No. 11; 1967, No. 1. Bulgakov dated the start of work on M. and M. in different manuscripts as either 1928 or 1929. Most likely, it dates back to 1928... ... Bulgakov Encyclopedia

This term has other meanings, see The Master and Margarita (meanings). The Master and Margarita ... Wikipedia

Yeshua is tall, but his height is human
by nature. He is tall in human terms
standards He's human. There is nothing of the Son of God in him.
M. Dunaev 1

Yeshua and the Master, despite the fact that they take up little space in the novel, are central characters novel. They have a lot in common: one is a wandering philosopher who does not remember his parents and has no one in the world; the other is a nameless employee of some Moscow museum, also completely alone.

The fates of both are tragic, and they owe this to the truth that is revealed to them: for Yeshua this is the idea of good; for the Master, this is the truth about the events of two thousand years ago, which he “guessed” in his novel.

Yeshua Ha-Nozri. From a religious point of view, the image of Yeshua Ha-Nozri is a deviation from Christian canons, and Master of Theology, Ph.D. philological sciences MM. Dunaev writes about this: “On the tree of lost truth, refined error, a fruit called “The Master and Margarita” ripened, with artistic brilliance, wittingly or unwittingly, distorting the fundamental principle [the Gospel. - V.K.], and the result was an anti-Christian novel, “the gospel of Satan”, “anti-liturgy”" 2. However, Bulgakov's Yeshua is an artistic, multidimensional image, its assessment and analysis are possible with various points point of view: religious, historical, psychological, ethical, philosophical, aesthetic... The fundamental multidimensionality of approaches gives rise to a multiplicity of points of view, giving rise to disputes about the essence of this character in the novel.

For the reader opening the novel for the first time, the name of this character is a mystery. What does it mean? "Yeshua(or Yehoshua) is the Hebrew form of the name Jesus, which translated means “God is my salvation,” or “Savior”" 3. Ha-Nozri in accordance with the common interpretation of this word it is translated as “Nazarene; Nazarene; from Nazareth”, that is hometown Jesus, where he spent his childhood (Jesus, as you know, was born in Bethlehem). But, since the author has chosen an unconventional form of naming the character, the bearer of this name itself must be unconventional from a religious point of view, non-canonical. Yeshua is an artistic, non-canonical “double” of Jesus Christ (Christ translated from Greek as “Messiah”).

The unconventionality of the image of Yeshua Ha-Nozri in comparison with gospel Jesus Christ is obvious:

· Yeshua in Bulgakov – "a man of about twenty-seven". Jesus Christ, as you know, was thirty-three years old at the time of his sacrificial feat. Regarding the date of birth of Jesus Christ, indeed, there are discrepancies among the church ministers themselves: Archpriest Alexander Men, citing the works of historians, believes that Christ was born 6-7 years earlier than his official birth, calculated in the 6th century by the monk Dionysius the Small 4. This example shows that M. Bulgakov, creating his “fantastic novel” (the author’s definition of the genre), was based on real historical facts;

· Bulgakov's Yeshua does not remember his parents. The mother and official father of Jesus Christ are named in all the Gospels;

Yeshua by blood "I think he's Syrian". Jewish origin Jesus is traced to Abraham (in the Gospel of Matthew);

· Yeshua has one and only disciple - Levi Matthew. Jesus, according to the evangelists, had twelve apostles;

· Yeshua is betrayed by Judas - some barely familiar young man, who, however, is not a disciple of Yeshua (as in the Gospel Judas is a disciple of Jesus);

· Bulgakov’s Judas was killed on the orders of Pilate, who at least wants to calm his conscience; evangelical Judas from Kariot hanged himself;

· after the death of Yeshua, his body is kidnapped and buried by Matthew Levi. In the Gospel - Joseph from Arimathea, “a disciple of Christ, but secret out of fear from the Jews”;

· the nature of the preaching of the Gospel Jesus has been changed, in M. Bulgakov’s novel only one moral position has been left "All people are kind" However, Christian teaching does not come down to this;

· the divine origin of the Gospels has been disputed. In the novel, Yeshua says about the notes on the parchment of his student Levi Matthew: “These good people... didn’t learn anything and confused everything I said. In general, I’m beginning to fear that this confusion will continue very for a long time. And all because he writes me down incorrectly.<...>He walks and walks alone with a goat's parchment and writes continuously. But one day I looked into this parchment and was horrified. I said absolutely nothing of what was written there. I begged him: burn your parchment for God’s sake! But he snatched it from my hands and ran away";

· there is no mention of the divine origin of the God-man and crucifixion - the atoning sacrifice (Bulgakov’s executed "sentenced... to be hanged from poles!").

Yeshua in the novel "The Master and Margarita" is, first of all, a man who finds moral, psychological support in himself and in his truth, to which he remained faithful to the end. Yeshua M. Bulgakov is perfect in spiritual beauty, but not external: "... was dressed in an old and torn blue 4chiton. His head was covered with a white bandage with a strap around his forehead, and his hands were tied behind his back. The man had a large bruise under his left eye and an abrasion with dried blood in the corner of his mouth. The man brought in looked at the procurator with anxious curiosity.". He is not alien to everything human, including he feels a sense of fear of the centurion Mark the Rat-Slayer; he is characterized by timidity and shyness. Wed. the scene of Yeshua's interrogation by Pilate in the novel and in the Gospel of John and Matthew:

With one left hand, Mark, like an empty sack, lifted the fallen man into the air, put him on his feet and spoke nasally: ...

The image of Yeshua Ha-Notsri in the novel by M. A. Bulgakov. According to literary scholars and M. A. Bulgakov himself, “The Master and Margarita” is his final work. Dying from a serious illness, the writer told his wife: “Maybe this is right... What could I write after “The Master”?” And in fact, this work is so multifaceted that the reader cannot immediately figure out which genre it belongs to. This is a fantastic, adventurous, satirical, and most of all philosophical novel.

Experts define the novel as a menippea, where a deep semantic load is hidden under the mask of laughter. In any case, in “The Master and Margarita” such opposite principles, like philosophy and fantasy, tragedy and farce, fantasy and realism. Another feature of the novel is the displacement of spatial, temporal and psychological characteristics. This is the so-called double novel, or a novel within a novel. Before the viewer’s eyes, echoing each other, two seemingly completely different stories.

The first action takes place in modern years in Moscow, and the second takes the reader to ancient Yershalaim. However, Bulgakov went even further: it is difficult to believe that these two stories were written by the same author. Moscow incidents are described in vivid language. There is a lot of comedy, fantasy, and devilry here. Here and there the author's familiar chatter with the reader develops into outright gossip. The narrative is based on a certain understatement, incompleteness, which generally calls into question the veracity of this part of the work. When it comes to the events in Yershalaim, artistic style changes dramatically. The story sounds stern and solemn, as if it were not work of art, and chapters from the Gospel: “In a white cloak with bloody lining, with a shuffling gait, in the early morning of the fourteenth day of the spring month of Nisan, the procurator of Judea, Pontius Pilate, came out into the covered colonnade between the two wings of the palace of Herod the Great...” Both parts, according to the writer’s plan, should show the reader the state of morality over the past two thousand years.

Yeshua Ha-Nozri came to this world at the beginning of the Christian era, preaching his teaching about goodness. However, his contemporaries were unable to understand and accept this truth. Yeshua was sentenced to shame death penalty- a crucifix on a pillar. From the point of view religious figures, the image of this person does not fit into any Christian canons. Moreover, the novel itself has been recognized as the “gospel of Satan.” However, Bulgakov's character is an image that includes religious, historical, ethical, philosophical, psychological and other features. That is why it is so difficult to analyze. Of course, Bulgakov, as an educated person, knew the Gospel very well, but he did not intend to write another example of spiritual literature. His work is deeply artistic. Therefore, the writer deliberately distorts the facts. Yeshua Ha-Nozri is translated as the savior from Nazareth, while Jesus was born in Bethlehem.

Bulgakov's hero is “a man of twenty-seven years old,” the Son of God was thirty-three years old. Yeshua has only one disciple, Matthew Levi, while Jesus has 12 apostles. Judas in The Master and Margarita was killed by order of Pontius Pilate; in the Gospel he hanged himself. With such inconsistencies, the author wants to once again emphasize that Yeshua in the work, first of all, is a person who managed to find psychological and moral support in himself and be faithful to it until the end of his life. Paying attention to appearance of his hero, he shows readers that spiritual beauty is much higher than external attractiveness: “... he was dressed in an old and torn blue chiton. His head was covered with a white bandage with a strap around his forehead, and his hands were tied behind his back. The man had a large bruise under his left eye and an abrasion with dried blood in the corner of his mouth.” This man was not divinely imperturbable. He, like ordinary people was subject to fear of Mark the Rat-Slayer or Pontius Pilate: “The man brought in looked at the procurator with anxious curiosity.” Yeshua was unaware of his divine origin, acting like an ordinary person.

Despite the fact that in the novel special attention is given human qualities the main character, his divine origin is not forgotten. At the end of the work, it is Yeshua who personifies that higher power, which instructs Woland to reward the master with peace. At the same time, the author did not perceive his character as a prototype of Christ. Yeshua concentrates in himself the image of the moral law, which enters into a tragic confrontation with legal law. Main character came into this world precisely with the moral truth - every person is good. This is the truth of the entire novel. And with her help, Bulgakov seeks to once again prove to people that God exists. The relationship between Yeshua and Pontius Pilate occupies a special place in the novel. It is to him that the wanderer says: “All power is violence over people... the time will come when there will be no power either of Caesar or any other power. Man will move into the kingdom of truth and justice, where no power will be needed at all.” Feeling some truth in the words of his prisoner, Pontius Pilate cannot let him go, for fear of harming his career. Under pressure from circumstances, he signs Yeshua’s death warrant and greatly regrets it. The hero tries to atone for his guilt by trying to convince the priest to release this particular prisoner in honor of the holiday. When his idea fails, he orders the servants to stop tormenting the hanged man and personally orders the death of Judas. The tragedy of the story about Yeshua Ha-Nozri lies in the fact that his teaching was not in demand. People at that time were not ready to accept his truth. The main character is even afraid that his words will be misunderstood: “... this confusion will continue for a very long time.” Yeshuya, who did not renounce his teachings, is a symbol of humanity and perseverance. His tragedy, but already in modern world, repeats the Master. Yeshua's death is quite predictable. The tragedy of the situation is further emphasized by the author with the help of a thunderstorm, which completes and storyline modern history: “Darkness. Came from Mediterranean Sea, covered the city hated by the procurator... An abyss fell from the sky. Yershalaim, a great city, disappeared, as if it did not exist in the world... Everything was devoured by darkness...”

With the death of the main character, the entire city plunged into darkness. At the same time, the moral state of the residents inhabiting the city left much to be desired. Yeshua is sentenced to “hanging on a stake,” which entails a long, painful execution. Among the townspeople there are many who want to admire this torture. Behind the cart with prisoners, executioners and soldiers “were about two thousand curious people who were not afraid of the hellish heat and wanted to be present at the interesting spectacle. These curious ones... have now been joined by curious pilgrims.” Approximately the same thing happens two thousand years later, when people strive to get to Woland’s scandalous performance in the Variety Show. From behavior modern people Satan concludes that human nature does not change: “...they are people like people. They love money, but this has always been the case... humanity loves money, no matter what it is made of, whether leather, paper, bronze or gold... Well, they are frivolous... well, mercy sometimes knocks on their hearts.” .

Throughout the entire novel, the author, on the one hand, seems to draw a clear boundary between the spheres of influence of Yeshua and Woland, however, on the other hand, the unity of their opposites is clearly visible. However, although in many situations Satan appears more significant than Yeshua, these rulers of light and darkness are quite equal. This is precisely the key to balance and harmony in this world, since the absence of one would make the presence of the other meaningless.

The peace that is awarded to the Master is a kind of agreement between two great powers. Moreover, Yeshua and Woland are driven to this decision by the usual human love. Thus, as the highest value of Bulgako

YESHUA HA-NOZRI

A character in the novel “The Master and Margarita”, going back to Jesus Christ of the Gospels. Bulgakov met the name “Yeshua Ga-Notsri” in Sergei Chevkin’s play “Yeshua Ganotsri. An impartial discovery of truth" (1922), and then checked it against the works of historians. The Bulgakov archive contains extracts from the book of the German philosopher Arthur Drews (1865-1935) “The Myth of Christ”, translated into Russian in 1924, where it was stated that in ancient Hebrew the word “natsar”, or “natzer”, means “branch” " or "branch", and "Yeshua" or "Joshua" is "help to Yahweh" or "God's help." True, in his other work, “Denial of the Historicity of Jesus in the Past and Present,” which appeared in Russian in 1930, Drewe preferred a different etymology of the word “natzer” (another option is “notzer”) - “guard”, “shepherd” ", joining the opinion of the British biblical historian William Smith (1846-1894) that even before our era, among the Jews there was a sect of Nazarenes, or Nazarenes, who worshiped the cult god Jesus (Joshua, Yeshua) "ha-notzri", i.e. . "Guardian Jesus." The writer’s archive also preserves extracts from the book “The Life of Jesus Christ” (1873) by the English historian and theologian Bishop Frederick W. Farrar. If Drewe and other historians of the mythological school sought to prove that the nickname of Jesus Nazarene (Ha-Nozri) is not of a geographical nature and is in no way connected with the city of Nazareth, which, in their opinion, did not yet exist in Gospel times, then Farrar, one of the most prominent adherents of the historical school (see: Christianity), defended traditional etymology. From his book, Bulgakov learned that one of the names of Christ mentioned in the Talmud - Ha-Nozri means Nazarene. Farrar translated the Hebrew “Yeshua” somewhat differently than Drewe, “whose salvation is Jehovah.” The English historian connected the city of En-Sarid with Nazareth, which Bulgakov also mentioned, causing Pilate to see in a dream “the beggar from En-Sarid.” During interrogation by prosecutor I.G.-N. The city of Gamala, mentioned in the book of the French writer Henri Barbusse (1873-1935) “Jesus against Christ,” appeared as the birthplace of the wandering philosopher. Extracts from this work, published in the USSR in 1928, are also preserved in the Bulgakov archive. Since there were different etymologies of the words “Yeshua” and “Ha-Notsri” that contradicted each other, Bulgakov did not in any way reveal the meaning of these names in the text of “The Master and Margarita”. Due to the incompleteness of the novel, the writer did not make his final choice on one of the two possible places of birth of I. G.-N.

In the portrait of I. G.-N. Bulgakov took into account the following message from Farrar: “The Church of the first centuries of Christianity, being familiar with the elegant form in which the genius of pagan culture embodied his ideas about the young gods of Olympus, but also aware of the fatal depravity of the sensual image in it, apparently tried with particular persistence to free himself It was from this idolization of bodily qualities that she took as Isain’s ideal the image of a stricken and humiliated sufferer or David’s enthusiastic description of a despised and reviled man by people (Ex., LIII, 4; Ps., XXI, 7, 8, 16, 18). His beauty, says Clement of Alexandria, was in his soul, but in appearance he was thin. Justin the Philosopher describes him as a man without beauty, without glory, without honor. His body, says Origen, was small, ill-built and unattractive. “His body,” says Tertullian, “did not have human beauty, much less heavenly splendor.” The English historian also cites the opinion of the Greek philosopher of the 2nd century. Celsus, who made the tradition of the simplicity and ugliness of Christ the basis for denying His divine origin. At the same time, Farrar refuted the assertion, based on an error in the Latin translation of the Bible - the Vulgate - that Christ, who healed many of leprosy, was himself a leper. The author of “The Master and Margarita” considered the early evidence about Christ’s appearance reliable, and made his I.G.-N. thin and homely with traces of physical violence on his face: the man who appeared before Pontius Pilate “was dressed in an old and torn blue tunic. His head was covered with a white bandage with a strap around his forehead, and his hands were tied behind his back. The man had a large bruise under his left eye and an abrasion with dried blood in the corner of his mouth. The man brought in looked at the procurator with anxious curiosity.” Bulgakov, unlike Farrar, strongly emphasizes that I.G.-N. - a man, not a God, which is why he is endowed with the most unattractive, unmemorable appearance. The English historian was convinced that Christ “could not have been in his appearance without the personal greatness of a prophet and high priest.” The author of “The Master and Margarita” took into account Farrar’s words that before being interrogated by the procurator, Jesus Christ was beaten twice. In one of the versions of the 1929 edition, I. G.-N. He directly asked Pilate: “Just don’t hit me too hard, otherwise they’ve already beaten me twice today...” After the beating, and even more so during the execution, Jesus’ appearance could not possibly contain signs of the greatness inherent in the prophet. On the cross at I. G.-N. Quite ugly features appear in his appearance: “. ..The face of the hanged man was revealed, swollen from bites, with swollen eyes, an unrecognizable face,” and “his eyes, usually clear, were now cloudy.” External disgrace I. G.-N. contrasts with the beauty of his soul and the purity of his idea about the triumph of truth and good people (and, in his opinion, there are no evil people in the world), just as, according to the Christian theologian of the 2nd-3rd centuries. Clement of Alexandria, the spiritual beauty of Christ contrasts with his ordinary appearance.

In the image of I. G.-N. reflected the reasoning of the Jewish publicist Arkady Grigorievich (Abraham-Uriah) Kovner (1842-1909), whose polemic with Dostoevsky became widely known. Bulgakov was probably familiar with the book dedicated to Kovner by Leonid Petrovich Grossman (1888-1965) “Confession of a Jew” (M.-L., 1924). There, in particular, a letter from Kovner was quoted, written in 1908 and criticizing the reasoning of the writer Vasily Vasilyevich Rozanov (1856-1919) about the essence of Christianity. Kovner argued, turning to Rozanov: “There is no doubt that Christianity has played and is playing a huge role in the history of culture, but it seems to me that the personality of Christ has almost nothing to do with it. Not to mention the fact that the personality of Christ is more mythical than real, which many historians doubt his very existence, that Jewish history and literature do not even mention him, that Christ himself is not at all the founder of Christianity, since the latter formed into a religion and church only a few centuries after the birth of Christ - not to mention everything this, because Christ himself did not look at himself as the savior of the human race. Why do you and your associates (Merezhkovsky, Berdyaev, etc.) place Christ as the center of the world, the God-man, holy flesh, a monoflower, etc. This cannot be allowed? so that you and your relatives sincerely believe in all the miracles that are told in the Gospels, in the real, concrete resurrection of Christ. And if everything in the Gospel about miracles is allegorical, then where do you get the deification of a good, ideally pure person, of which, however, the whole world. history knows a lot? How many good people have died for their ideas and beliefs? How many of them suffered all sorts of torment in Egypt, India, Judea, Greece? In what way is Christ higher, more holy than all the martyrs? Why did he become a god-man?

I.G.-N. Bulgakov speaks to Pilate in completely human language, and appears only in his human, and not divine, incarnation. All the gospel miracles and the resurrection remain outside the novel. I.G.-N. does not act as the creator of a new religion. This role is destined for Matvey Levi, who “writes down incorrectly” for his teacher. And nineteen centuries later, even many of those who consider themselves Christians continue to remain in paganism. It is no coincidence that in the early editions of The Master and Margarita, one of the Orthodox priests organized a sale of church valuables right in the church, and another, Father Arkady Elladov, convinced Nikanor Ivanovich Bosogo and other arrested people to hand over their currency. Subsequently, these episodes were removed from the novel due to their obvious obscenity. I.G.-N. - this is Christ, cleared of mythological layers, a good, pure man who died for his conviction that all people are good. And only Matthew Levi, a cruel man, as Pontius Pilate calls him, and who knows that “there will still be blood”, is able to found a church.

1. Best Work Bulgakov.
2. The deep intention of the writer.
3. Complex image of Yeshua Ha-Nozri.
4. The cause of the hero's death.
5. Heartlessness and indifference of people.
6. Agreement between light and darkness.

According to literary scholars and M. A. Bulgakov himself, “The Master and Margarita” is his final work. Dying from a serious illness, the writer told his wife: “Maybe this is right... What could I write after “The Master”?” And in fact, this work is so multifaceted that the reader cannot immediately figure out which genre it belongs to. This is a fantastic, adventurous, satirical, and most of all philosophical novel.

Experts define the novel as a menippea, where a deep semantic load is hidden under the mask of laughter. In any case, “The Master and Margarita” harmoniously reunites such opposing principles as philosophy and science fiction, tragedy and farce, fantasy and realism. Another feature of the novel is the shift in spatial, temporal and psychological characteristics. This is the so-called double novel, or a novel within a novel. Two seemingly completely different stories pass before the viewer’s eyes, echoing each other. The action of the first takes place in modern years in Moscow, and the second takes the reader to ancient Yershalaim. However, Bulgakov went even further: it is difficult to believe that these two stories were written by the same author. Moscow incidents are described in vivid language. There is a lot of comedy, fantasy, and devilry here. Here and there the author's familiar chatter with the reader develops into outright gossip. The narrative is based on a certain understatement, incompleteness, which generally calls into question the veracity of this part of the work. When it comes to the events in Yershalaim, the artistic style changes dramatically. The story sounds strictly and solemnly, as if this is not a work of art, but chapters from the Gospel: “In a white cloak with a bloody lining, and with a shuffling gait, in the early morning of the fourteenth day of the spring month of Nisan, the procurator of Judea, Pontius Pilate, came out into the covered colonnade between the two wings of the palace of Herod the Great. .." Both parts, according to the writer’s plan, should show the reader the state of morality over the past two thousand years.

Yeshua Ha-Nozri came to this world at the beginning of the Christian era, preaching his teaching about goodness. However, his contemporaries were unable to understand and accept this truth. Yeshua was sentenced to the shameful death penalty - crucifixion on a stake. From the point of view of religious leaders, the image of this person does not fit into any Christian canons. Moreover, the novel itself has been recognized as the “gospel of Satan.” However, Bulgakov's character is an image that includes religious, historical, ethical, philosophical, psychological and other features. That is why it is so difficult to analyze. Of course, Bulgakov, as an educated person, knew the Gospel very well, but he did not intend to write another example of spiritual literature. His work is deeply artistic. Therefore, the writer deliberately distorts the facts. Yeshua Ha-Nozri is translated as the savior from Nazareth, while Jesus was born in Bethlehem.

Bulgakov's hero is “a man of twenty-seven years old,” the Son of God was thirty-three years old. Yeshua has only one disciple, Matthew Levi, while Jesus has 12 apostles. Judas in The Master and Margarita was killed by order of Pontius Pilate; in the Gospel he hanged himself. With such inconsistencies, the author wants to once again emphasize that Yeshua in the work, first of all, is a person who managed to find psychological and moral support in himself and be faithful to it until the end of his life. Paying attention to the appearance of his hero, he shows readers that spiritual beauty is much higher than external attractiveness: “... he was dressed in an old and torn blue chiton. His head was covered with a white bandage with a strap around his forehead, and his hands were tied behind his back. The man had a large bruise under his left eye and an abrasion with dried blood in the corner of his mouth.” This man was not divinely imperturbable. He, like ordinary people, was subject to fear of Mark the Rat-Slayer or Pontius Pilate: “The one brought in looked at the procurator with anxious curiosity.” Yeshua was unaware of his divine origin, acting like an ordinary person.

Despite the fact that the novel pays special attention to the human qualities of the protagonist, his divine origin is not forgotten. At the end of the work, it is Yeshua who personifies that higher power that instructs Woland to reward the master with peace. At the same time, the author did not perceive his character as a prototype of Christ. Yeshua concentrates in himself the image of the moral law, which enters into a tragic confrontation with legal law. The main character came into this world with a moral truth - every person is kind. This is the truth of the entire novel. And with the help of it, Bulgakov seeks to once again prove to people that God exists. The relationship between Yeshua and Pontius Pilate occupies a special place in the novel. It is to him that the wanderer says: “All power is violence over people... the time will come when there will be no power either of Caesar or any other power. Man will move into the kingdom of truth and justice, where no power will be needed at all.” Feeling some truth in the words of his prisoner, Pontius Pilate cannot let him go, for fear of harming his career. Under pressure from circumstances, he signs Yeshua’s death warrant and greatly regrets it.

The hero tries to atone for his guilt by trying to convince the priest to release this particular prisoner in honor of the holiday. When his idea fails, he orders the servants to stop tormenting the hanged man and personally orders the death of Judas. The tragedy of the story about Yeshua Ha-Nozri lies in the fact that his teaching was not in demand. People at that time were not ready to accept his truth. The main character is even afraid that his words will be misunderstood: “...this confusion will continue for a very long time.” Yeshua, who did not renounce his teachings, is a symbol of humanity and perseverance. His tragedy, but in the modern world, is repeated by the Master. Yeshua's death is quite predictable. The tragedy of the situation is further emphasized by the author with the help of a thunderstorm, which completes the plot line of modern history: “Darkness. Coming from the Mediterranean Sea, it covered the city hated by the procurator... An abyss fell from the sky. Yershalaim, a great city, disappeared, as if it did not exist in the world... Everything was devoured by darkness...”

With the death of the main character, the entire city plunged into darkness. At the same time, the moral state of the residents inhabiting the city left much to be desired. Yeshua is sentenced to “hanging on a stake,” which entails a long, painful execution. Among the townspeople there are many who want to admire this torture. Behind the cart with prisoners, executioners and soldiers “were about two thousand curious people who were not afraid of the hellish heat and wanted to be present at the interesting spectacle. These curious ones... have now been joined by curious pilgrims.” Approximately the same thing happens two thousand years later, when people strive to get to Woland’s scandalous performance in the Variety Show. From the behavior of modern people, Satan concludes that human nature does not change: “...they are people like people. They love money, but this has always been the case... humanity loves money, no matter what it is made of, whether leather, paper, bronze or gold... Well, they are frivolous... well, and mercy sometimes knocks on their hearts.”

Throughout the entire novel, the author, on the one hand, seems to draw a clear boundary between the spheres of influence of Yeshua and Woland, however, on the other hand, the unity of their opposites is clearly visible. However, despite the fact that in many situations Satan appears more significant than Yeshua, these rulers of light and darkness are quite equal. This is precisely the key to balance and harmony in this world, since the absence of one would make the presence of the other meaningless.

The peace that is awarded to the Master is a kind of agreement between two great powers. Moreover, Yeshua and Woland are driven to this decision by ordinary human love. Thus, Bulgakov still considers this wonderful feeling as the highest value.