03-15-2012, 10:32 PM
A NEW INTRODUCTION TO
THE BODY OF TATHÃâGATAS
alias
THE NEW TESTAMENT
by Chr. Lindtner
Klavreström 9/11 2003
Introduction
The best way to engage in a serious study of the four New Testament Gospels is, I claim, to start by counting the number of verses, the number of words, the number of syllables and the number of letters that the Greek text of course consists of. The Greek text is easily available, even online.
You may be startled by my rather prosaic claim that one has to start by counting the words, the syllables and the letters of God in the good news of his son, Jesus Christ. None of the numerous modern introductions to the New Testament start out by inviting the student to start counting.
When you start counting, however, you will soon see that the unknown authors of the Gospels must have paid extreme attention to each word and syllable, to their number and to their numerical value, what the Greeks call psêphos. In a lecture published in 1970, the Dutch NT scholar Joost Smit Sibinga observed, with regard to Matthew, that he, ââ¬Å...arranged his text in such a way that the size of the individual sections is fixed by a determined number of syllables. The individual parts of a sentence, the sentences themselves, sections of a smaller and larger size, they are, all of them, characterized in a purely quantitative way by their number of syllablesââ¬Â.
Subsequent research, notably by Smit Sibinga himself, M.J.J. Menken and others, have proved that Smit Sibingaôs observation applies not only to Matthew but also to the other evangelists, probably even to all the 27 writings constituting the body of the NT.
The CLT states, briefly, that the Gospels, perhaps even the NT as a whole, is a Pirate-copy of the Buddhist Gospels, or of the Buddhaôs Testament. These terms will be defined in due course.
I have also spoken of translations, whereby I mean imitations. To be more precise, I should speak of Pirate-copies in the sense of universal imitations. When I speak of ââ¬Åuniversalââ¬Â imitations, I mean to say that the Gospels not only imitate the sense of the Sanskrit originals. The Gospels also imitate the form and the numerical values found at various levels in the original. When I speak of a Pirate-copy, I wish to suggest that the authors of the Gospels (and the NT as a whole) also wanted to keep their sources secret. The secret of the Christ, ho khristos, is the secret of the ksatriyas. The kingdom of heaven was ââ¬Åreceived without payââ¬Â, Matthew 10:8, ââ¬Åand men of violence take it by forceââ¬Â, Matthew 11:12. It is in this sense I speak of copies made by unknown pirates. The authors of the NT wished to remain unknown, exactly as the authors of the original Buddhist texts wished to remain unknow to posterity. It must always be kept in mind that the authors wished to keep their true identity secret.
The fact that we are, if I am not mistaken, speaking of secret imitations, Pirate-copies, obviously does not make it easier for us to identify the sources of the Gospels.
My friend, Dr. J. Duncan M. Derrett, who incidentally sends his cordial greeting to the participants of this symposium, says, with Garbe: ââ¬Å To require close verbal similarity is too ask too muchââ¬Â.
By here my learned friend is simply too modest in his demands.
As you all are aware, there is a so-called synoptic problem. Matthew, Mark and Luke have a lot in common. But there are some differences. The synoptic problem has to do with the mutual relationship between the three Gospels. It is discussed in any modern introduction to the NT. Augustine held that Mark depended on Matthew, and Luke on Matthew and Mark. A modern theory saying that Mark was the first evangelist, and that Matthew and Luke depended not only on Mark but also on a source, now termed Q(uelle), but no longer available, has found fairly general (but not universal) acceptance. The hypothesis of Q, however, cannot account for what Q actually looked like, who made it, its language, what ever became of Q etc., and it fails to explain the origin of Mark.
Conclusion
Buddhists have a long tradition for counting the number of words and syllables in their gospels. They also have a deep experience in translating Indian texts into foreign languages. It goes back to the time of king Asoka.108 is the lucky number. Even the Rgveda is said to consists of 10800 x 40 syllables. Many texts have titles indicating the number of syllables that it consists of Masters of counting are often extolled in the Buddhist texts. They are said to be masters of gananâ or ganite.
There is still a long way ahead of us, but we can already now see the light at the end of the tunnel.
It is a fact that the Buddhist and Christian evangelists counted the words and syllables and that they were aware of the numerical values of each letter. My book gives some examples and each day new examples are brought to light.
How they managed to construe careful numerical patterns on several levels at the same time is still a puzzle to me. Did they employ some sort of mechanical device - or did they possess some extraordinary powers of memorizing?
The example with Kêphas and petra shows that sometimes the evangelists were thinking in geometrical patterns.
It is therefore natural to search for geometrical patterns behind, on the one hand 108 and 100 etc., and on the other, behind 888 and 666. If we are a bit familiar with more occult Western traditions the numbers mentioned above point in the direction of various geometrical figures, above all the pentagon and pentagram and the so-called magic square, inscribed in circles.
For details I refer to the drawings of the Pentagram and the Magic Square.
Some interesting 108 cases in the New Testament
1. Mark 1 begins his gospel about ôIêsou Khristou, Sanskrit ksatriyasya, with an OT quotation. OT is also a part of the real Q, of course. - Then follows a unit of 108 words in 4-9. This is followed by 6 other units of 108 words, viz. 18-24, 21-27, 23-29, 31-38, 32-39 and 33-40. Moreover, the first four verses along with the two final verses, 44-45, add up to 108 words.
The beginning-end pattern, the alpha-omega pattern, is repeated in Mark 13, where the first 3 verses and the last 4 verses add up to 108 words.
2. Mark 5 displays another pattern with 108 in the focus. Verses 1-20 consist of 324 or 3x108 words. Verses 24-37 consist of 216 or 2x108 words. The ââ¬Åmissingââ¬Â verses, namely 21-23 and 38-43 add up to 158 or 108+50 or 1/2 of 100.
Verses 25-31, a unit about the woman who had had a flow of blood for twelve years, also consists of 108 words. All the stories, including the figures, can be traced back to the MSV.
http://www.jesusisbuddha.com/CLT.html
THE BODY OF TATHÃâGATAS
alias
THE NEW TESTAMENT
by Chr. Lindtner
Klavreström 9/11 2003
Introduction
The best way to engage in a serious study of the four New Testament Gospels is, I claim, to start by counting the number of verses, the number of words, the number of syllables and the number of letters that the Greek text of course consists of. The Greek text is easily available, even online.
You may be startled by my rather prosaic claim that one has to start by counting the words, the syllables and the letters of God in the good news of his son, Jesus Christ. None of the numerous modern introductions to the New Testament start out by inviting the student to start counting.
When you start counting, however, you will soon see that the unknown authors of the Gospels must have paid extreme attention to each word and syllable, to their number and to their numerical value, what the Greeks call psêphos. In a lecture published in 1970, the Dutch NT scholar Joost Smit Sibinga observed, with regard to Matthew, that he, ââ¬Å...arranged his text in such a way that the size of the individual sections is fixed by a determined number of syllables. The individual parts of a sentence, the sentences themselves, sections of a smaller and larger size, they are, all of them, characterized in a purely quantitative way by their number of syllablesââ¬Â.
Subsequent research, notably by Smit Sibinga himself, M.J.J. Menken and others, have proved that Smit Sibingaôs observation applies not only to Matthew but also to the other evangelists, probably even to all the 27 writings constituting the body of the NT.
The CLT states, briefly, that the Gospels, perhaps even the NT as a whole, is a Pirate-copy of the Buddhist Gospels, or of the Buddhaôs Testament. These terms will be defined in due course.
I have also spoken of translations, whereby I mean imitations. To be more precise, I should speak of Pirate-copies in the sense of universal imitations. When I speak of ââ¬Åuniversalââ¬Â imitations, I mean to say that the Gospels not only imitate the sense of the Sanskrit originals. The Gospels also imitate the form and the numerical values found at various levels in the original. When I speak of a Pirate-copy, I wish to suggest that the authors of the Gospels (and the NT as a whole) also wanted to keep their sources secret. The secret of the Christ, ho khristos, is the secret of the ksatriyas. The kingdom of heaven was ââ¬Åreceived without payââ¬Â, Matthew 10:8, ââ¬Åand men of violence take it by forceââ¬Â, Matthew 11:12. It is in this sense I speak of copies made by unknown pirates. The authors of the NT wished to remain unknown, exactly as the authors of the original Buddhist texts wished to remain unknow to posterity. It must always be kept in mind that the authors wished to keep their true identity secret.
The fact that we are, if I am not mistaken, speaking of secret imitations, Pirate-copies, obviously does not make it easier for us to identify the sources of the Gospels.
My friend, Dr. J. Duncan M. Derrett, who incidentally sends his cordial greeting to the participants of this symposium, says, with Garbe: ââ¬Å To require close verbal similarity is too ask too muchââ¬Â.
By here my learned friend is simply too modest in his demands.
As you all are aware, there is a so-called synoptic problem. Matthew, Mark and Luke have a lot in common. But there are some differences. The synoptic problem has to do with the mutual relationship between the three Gospels. It is discussed in any modern introduction to the NT. Augustine held that Mark depended on Matthew, and Luke on Matthew and Mark. A modern theory saying that Mark was the first evangelist, and that Matthew and Luke depended not only on Mark but also on a source, now termed Q(uelle), but no longer available, has found fairly general (but not universal) acceptance. The hypothesis of Q, however, cannot account for what Q actually looked like, who made it, its language, what ever became of Q etc., and it fails to explain the origin of Mark.
Conclusion
Buddhists have a long tradition for counting the number of words and syllables in their gospels. They also have a deep experience in translating Indian texts into foreign languages. It goes back to the time of king Asoka.108 is the lucky number. Even the Rgveda is said to consists of 10800 x 40 syllables. Many texts have titles indicating the number of syllables that it consists of Masters of counting are often extolled in the Buddhist texts. They are said to be masters of gananâ or ganite.
There is still a long way ahead of us, but we can already now see the light at the end of the tunnel.
It is a fact that the Buddhist and Christian evangelists counted the words and syllables and that they were aware of the numerical values of each letter. My book gives some examples and each day new examples are brought to light.
How they managed to construe careful numerical patterns on several levels at the same time is still a puzzle to me. Did they employ some sort of mechanical device - or did they possess some extraordinary powers of memorizing?
The example with Kêphas and petra shows that sometimes the evangelists were thinking in geometrical patterns.
It is therefore natural to search for geometrical patterns behind, on the one hand 108 and 100 etc., and on the other, behind 888 and 666. If we are a bit familiar with more occult Western traditions the numbers mentioned above point in the direction of various geometrical figures, above all the pentagon and pentagram and the so-called magic square, inscribed in circles.
For details I refer to the drawings of the Pentagram and the Magic Square.
Some interesting 108 cases in the New Testament
1. Mark 1 begins his gospel about ôIêsou Khristou, Sanskrit ksatriyasya, with an OT quotation. OT is also a part of the real Q, of course. - Then follows a unit of 108 words in 4-9. This is followed by 6 other units of 108 words, viz. 18-24, 21-27, 23-29, 31-38, 32-39 and 33-40. Moreover, the first four verses along with the two final verses, 44-45, add up to 108 words.
The beginning-end pattern, the alpha-omega pattern, is repeated in Mark 13, where the first 3 verses and the last 4 verses add up to 108 words.
2. Mark 5 displays another pattern with 108 in the focus. Verses 1-20 consist of 324 or 3x108 words. Verses 24-37 consist of 216 or 2x108 words. The ââ¬Åmissingââ¬Â verses, namely 21-23 and 38-43 add up to 158 or 108+50 or 1/2 of 100.
Verses 25-31, a unit about the woman who had had a flow of blood for twelve years, also consists of 108 words. All the stories, including the figures, can be traced back to the MSV.
http://www.jesusisbuddha.com/CLT.html