Louis C. de Figueiredo - The Quest for Jesus in Shroud Research

7/27/2019 Louis C. de Figueiredo - The Quest for Jesus in Shroud Research

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/louis-c-de-figueiredo-the-quest-for-jesus-in-shroud-research 1/8

The Quest for Jesus in Shroud research

Louis C. de Figueiredo

According to Msgr. John P. Meier, the world’s foremost Jesus of history researcher, there are so many

books “about” Jesus that a Buddhist sinner may well be condemned to three reincarnations in order to

read all of them. Awarded two aal gold medals when studying Bible and theology in !ome, Meier’s

enormous erudition cannot be "uestioned. #t is only ossible to take his dry humour a bit further and add

that if the desired results are not achie$ed, and the oor sinner is obliged to return to this world ofmaterial things to face the same unishment, he will find many more iles awaiting his erusal.

%hat is what can be said about the number of books “about” Jesus. &ne of these aeared recently in the

'hroud booklist and takes the reader to #ndia, where, according to the author, he li$ed and died after

sur$i$ing the crucifi(ion. Many eole know that this is actually an old story, which began around a

hundred and fifty years ago, and, deending on the author, can be di$ided into two arts, re) and ost)

crucifi(ion. As for the source, it is formed by three strands, only the last one being fairly recent.

%he first author was *icholas *oto$itch, definitely not known as a scholar, and classified as a sy in the

#ndia !ecords &ffice, containing documents from +-- to +/0, the eriod sanning British rule in #ndia,

reser$ed in the British 1ibrary. And what did *oto$itch write2 3e wrote a book claiming he had found

manuscrits in the Buddhist monastery in 3emis, #ndia which constituted nothing less than concrete roof

of Jesus’ 4ourney to #ndia. 3is find was dismissed as a hoa( in the $ery eriod in which he made the

announcement, raising "uestions about his $ery secret agenda that ha$e not been answered to this day.

%he second strand came from the eaceful #slamist re$i$al mo$ement founded in #ndia at the end of the

nineteenth century by 3a5rat Mir5a 6hulam Ahmad by claiming ri$ate re$elations and announcing that

he was the Mahdi, the romised messiah of #slam. #t emerged less than a decade after Ahmad bin Abd

Allah of 7gytian 'udan had made the same claim with a $iolent aroach, his Mahdist warriors killing

6eneral 6ordon in the midst of a war that was brought to an end by the $ictory of 6eneral 8itchener in

the Battle of &mdurman.

%he third and last strand is "uite recent and takes the form of a few lines in the Bhavishya Purana, 3indureligious te(ts that are suosedly rohetic and ha$e become the ob4ect of an ongoing contro$ersy. %he

inclusion of these te(ts as an integral art of the “Jesus in #ndia” story comes as the biggest surrise.

All three strands are wo$en together to lead to the !o5abal tomb, near 'rinagar, in the #ndian state of

Jammu 9 8ashmir, where Jesus :as ;u5 Asaf< is said to be buried ))) ne(t to a Muslim saint. =hat can

one make of all this2

>irst of all, it is not hard to figure out that 3a5rat Mir5a 6hulam Ahmad resorted to distorting the

6osels as art of his strategy to get Jesus out of the way and make room for himself as the Mahdi and

Messiah of #slam. =hat he claimed is in fact a disute within Islam, for which reason ?hristian

theologians ha$e ignored it, but it has emerged in the 'hroud media unnecessarily. As for the rest in the

bo(, the iecing together of isolated data leads to many "uestions that re"uire answers.

%hese are@



• %he 3indus in #ndia cremate their dead and scatter the ashes on large water bodies like a ri$er or

sea. 3ow is it that a tomb was unnoticed, with absolutely no record, in a region where Muslims

))) who bury their dead ))) only began to establish themsel$es in the +/ th century, more recisely

in the year +-2

• 3arsha Cardhana :AD E- F /0<, the last king of *orthern #ndia, whose kingdom e(tended to

8ashmir, was known as a atron of arts and literature and took a dee interest in religion,

making a blend of Buddhism and 3induism for his own use. =hy is it that the coer

inscritions and literature roduced during his reign make no mention of Jesus2 %his is strange

considering that it has been asserted that Jesus came into contact with both Buddhists and

3indus and made some imact

• 'urely some information about ;u5 Asaf ))) robably a 'ufi mystic ))) must ha$e been a$ailable

to the eole who buried 'yed *aseeruddin ne(t to him2 %o deny this is like saying they took it

for granted that Asaf was Muslim and acted against their own beliefs.

• =hy do the “car$ed footrints with crucifi(ion wounds” reser$ed in the !o5abal tomb look

similar to the Buddhaada, or Buddha’s footrints with the Dharmachakra wheel, found in

se$eral laces in #ndia and neighbouring regions2 %he toes of the right foot are of the same

length, as seen in both feet in the Buddhaadas, while the left foot looks more “normal”.

• %he car$ed footrints are said to ha$e been disco$ered only in +EG, after the wa( residue on the

floor was remo$ed. *obody noticed them for one thousand and nine hundred and fifty years2

• =hy is it that only 3olger 8ersten and 8urt Berna :3ans *aber<, well)known names in the story,

are cited in connection with the car$ed footrints and no e(erts were consulted for a real

4udicious assessment2

• #t is claimed that the “crucifi(ion wounds” seen in the footrints reser$ed in the tomb are

similar to the wounds in the feet in the 'hroud image. #s there scientific study that can

demonstrate this2

• %he manuscrits referring to Jesus that *oto$itch claimed to ha$e seen are an essential art of

the 3oly 'criture of the “Jesus in #ndia” story. =hy are they not a$ailable for e(amination2



• =hy is there no mention that *oto$itch changed his story in the reface of his second edition by

reducing the si5e of the manuscrits ))) from two $olumes to a coule of ages scattered in other

books without titles ))) when the &rientalist Ma( MHller challenged him2

• =hy is nothing being said about the resoundingly negati$e analysis Strange New Gospels by the

Batist biblical scholar 7dgar J. 6oodseed ublished by the Ini$ersity of ?hicago Press2

=riting in the Catholic Biblical Quarterly uentin uesnell used his methodology to e(ose

another hoa( ))) the one eretrated by Morton 'mith.

• 3ow much did *oto$itch understand about religion2 3e wrote in his book that “Jesus so4ourned

si( years among the Buddhists where he found the rincile of monotheism still ure.” 3ow can

there be monotheism in a non)theistic system, where there is no deity2 Buddha was the first

atheist to ha$e founded a religion successfully.

• =here all those inscritions about Jesus in #ndia and why ha$e they not been hotograhed and

made a$ailable2 ?onclusions must be drawn from e(isting dataK otherwise they are oen to the

charge that they are sulied by means of imagination.

• 3ow old are the coies of the Bhavishya Purana2 Are there any rior to the eriod of British

administration of #ndia to ro$e that it is not mainly a nineteenth)century redaction2 #f Jesus is

mentioned, so are Moses and ueen Cictoria it seems, and 4udging from the $iews of scholars

such as !.8. !amanu4an and Mori5 =internit5, it is e$idently a comosite te(t or “oensystem,” some sort of =ikiedia, the difference being that there was interolation instead of

editing.

• =hy is it not mentioned that 'wami Abhedananda ne$er saw the manuscrits *oto$itch claimed

to ha$e disco$ered2 %he original was said to ha$e been in Pali and he was shown “an e(act

translation” in %ibetan, which he could not read, and had it translated.

• =hy is Jesus referred to with two different names in the “Jesus in #ndia” story2 #n the Bhavishya Purana he is called “#sa Putra”, while he is “;u5 Asaf” in the !o5abal tomb. “#sa” is definitely

Jesus in Arabic and his name in #slam, so how did it aear in an ancient Hindu document,

centuries before the ad$ent of #slam in #ndia2 %he 3indus ha$e always called Jesus Yeshu.

• #t is the 3indu wandering monk 'wami Ci$ekananda ))) rofoundly influenced by Jesus, like

Mahatma 6andhi, both of whom considered Jesus as avatar, 6od incarnate ))) and not

Abhedanda who is a towering figure in 3induism and has a beautiful 3indu temle named after

him in #ndia. 3e dismissed *oto$itch’s claims, stressing that as the Jagannath %emle in Puri,

#ndia was originally Buddhist, Jesus could not ha$e learnt from Brahmin riests there. 'o why

ha$e his $iews been swet under the rug in the roaganda ))) including some with clearly

olitical ends ))) that is being made about Jesus in #ndia and the !o5abal tomb2



• =hy are the *asranis, an ancient originally Jewish)?hristian community in the south of #ndia,

not mentioned2

3ow 'wami Ci$ekananda, who li$ed during the same eriod as 3a5rat Mir5a 6hulam Ahmad, would

ha$e reacted to the recent roaganda is not hard to guess. Insatisfied with the imersonal, all)er$asi$e

Brahman, the Iltimate !eality, he sought a ersonal 6od and found in Jesus ))) firmly rooted in history

))) a good e(amle of the incarnation of the ersonal 6od on earth and welcome in his Cedanta 3induism.

But, whate$er he may ha$e thought, the "uestions raised abo$e do need answers in an issue that has

de$eloed with an American researcher demanding D*A analysis of the tomb while claiming to be a

descendant of Jesus after she “traced her family genealogy” in a museum in Demarest, *J.

As far as the 'hroud media is concerned, and in $iew of the fact that the usual academic rocess has been

circum$ented, it would ha$e been better to obtain easily a$ailable information and refrain from

establishing links with the Jesus in #ndia story and the !o5abal tomb, articularly that one where

dangerous comments about Jesus ha$e been made while itting one religious tradition against another. #t

is almost daily news that the blood of innocent eole is being shed in the 7astern art of the world. 'uch

is the situation there that it has romted statements by Poe Benedict LC# and Dr. !owan =illiams, the

Archbisho of ?anterbury and the most senior bisho of the ?hurch of 7ngland.

After all, it is not fresh news that the caretakers of the Muslim !o5abal tomb are aware of much

suosition going under the guise of fact and are recorded to ha$e stated that “;u5 Asaf and 'yed

*aseeruddin are buried here and both are Muslims.” %he other incidents that took lace in the area are

also a$ailable for anyone to see in older news items, among which is the BB? saying that it is all an

“eclectic continuation of *ew Age ?hristians, unorthodo( Muslims and fans of the Da Cinci ?ode.”

Also, contrary to what was also asserted in the agenda)dri$en roaganda, the !o5abal tomb is notneeded to “e(and” Jesus’ role in history. %hat role was defined more than a century ago by the e()

seminarian !enan. As an historian, and not as “a riest in the guts”, as *iet5sche, whose interretation of

history differed from that of 3eidegger, ortrayed him to ursue his own ends.

&f course, the main reason to re4ect the !o5abal tomb ))) like the “Jesus family tomb” that came under

the scathing assessment of Dr. Amos 8loner, former District Archaeologist of Jerusalem ))) is that there is

significant historical e$idence of the resurrection of Jesus, making sketical theories more comlicated

and thus imrobable. %he literature on this art of the ?hrist)e$ent is $ast. 'uffice it to say here that the

arties resonsible for Jesus’ e(ecution must ha$e had agents around to make sure he was dead before

being taken to the tomb. !oman centurions certainly knew how to deli$er a fatal thrust with a lance,

which was not e$en necessary in the case of Jesus, but they had to make sure he was dead in order to tell

Pontius Pilate, who was afraid of losing his ost as refect of Judaea, that the mission was accomlished.

%here is no reason to doubt that the same mob in$ol$ed in demanding his crucifi(ion was also resent in

6olgotha and, had something gone wrong, would rush to tell ?aiahas, who in turn, would ha$e news for

%iberius. #t would ha$e been an e(cellent oortunity to ha$e Pilate sent back to !ome. 3e antagoni5ed

the Jews and was known to ha$e massacred some Pharisees.

=hat the 6osels say is that some of the religious authorities sread the rumour that Jesus’ body was

stolen, not that he suried the crucifi!ion. 6amaliel, Josehus and Paul were the leading Jewish minds

of the eriod in !oman)occuied Palestine and knew what they were talking about. >or a Jew resurrection

meant bodily resurrection :Daniel +@< and not 6reek hilosohy and that was what the aostle Paul, the

self)identified Jew of the tribe of Ben4amin, was referring to.

=hich is why it is necessary to oint out that to embellish or distort biblical e$ents with imagined details

not consonant with the truth is something "uite easy. %hat is what the #srael Anti"uities Authority aears



to ha$e felt in relation to the “Jesus family tomb,” with a number of "ualified e(erts on both sides of the

story. 'o when it comes to one dissident grou seeking suort in what is aarently a mediae$al tomb

with no hard documentary and archaeological e$idence to resent but only a string of roblematic and

unsubstantiated claims, the case becomes e(tremely uncon$incing, in fact highly susect.

Directing attention now to the roducti$e side of 'hroud research, which is try to know if the Man of the

'hroud is Jesus, a number of eer)re$iewed and other aers oint to the fact that the matter is highly

comle(. %he widely)reorted results roduced by Paolo di 1a55aro and the 7*7A team ma" hel in

understanding the energy in$ol$ed in the roduction of the 'hroud image. >ormer >B# 'ecial Agent and

'hroud researcher Phili 7. Day$ault’s disco$ery of the 'anliurfa mosaic, an image also described in

'hroud historian #an =ilson’s book The Shroud. Fresh light on the 2000-year-old mystery :Bantam

Books< is another iece of good news demonstrating how the 7dessa cloth and the 'hroud are linked.

%hat at least some lants and flowers from the Jerusalem region are clearly $isible on the relic is e$ident

in the beautifully illustrated book The Botany of the Shroud by A$inoam Danin, 7meritus Professor ofBotany at the 3ebrew Ini$ersity of Jerusalem, who is also inclined to belie$e that the Man of the 'hroud

is Jesus. #t is of course likely that with his trained eye he sees a lot more than a layman. Infortunately

alynology is not Danin’s field and a more comlete study of the ollen grains on the 'hroud remains at a

standstill till the collection that once belonged to Dr. Ma( >rei)'ul5er is a$ailable for e(amination by a

"ualified e(ert. 'till, it is ossible to 4udge from what has been written that >rei, a criminologist, did a

good 4ob on the whole, better than what Iri Baruch and Prof. %. 1itt did ))) ut together.



%he fact that images of lants and flowers from the Jerusalem can be seen on the 'hroud lends credence

to this author’s contention that the relic has nothing to do with what can be seen on the Josice Mattress

#mrint, robably the result of the arasychological henomenon known as telergy. Any 'iritualist

connotations can therefore be ruled out, for genuine arasychological henomena are sontaneous and

ha$e to be distinguished from religion. Additional suort for this oint of $iew also comes from an

unublished aer by Prof. 6iulio >anti, at the Ini$ersity of Padua, who has disco$ered some 8irlian

characteristics in the #mrint. >anti has been working hard on some fi$e different areas of 'hroud

research and so we can shortly hoe to see what has been described as ieces of a big mosaic that tend toshow the authenticity of the 'hroud.

As for the $arious hyotheses about how the +GG carbon dating test may ha$e been skewed nothing can

be said with certainty as long as there is no second direct e(amination of the relic, and, gi$en the current

state of affairs, it does not seem ad$isable to demand the destruction of another iece of the relic for

another test. 'uch an assertion is bound to raise eyebrows, but then, as Professor ?hristoher !amsey of

the &(ford !adiocarbon Accelerator Init ad$ises, one has to make sure that all of the hyotheses to be

tested are clearly laid out so that the rele$ant tests can be undertaken. %he rationale behind this is clear

and con$incing. =hat is to be a$oided is another set of measurements and ha$e this followed by new

hyotheses that re"uire further tests. %he roblem is@ how is that to be done if there is no consensus2

A rofessing ?hristian who understands ?hristianity $ery well, !amsey kees his religion and scienceaart and told the BB? that the 'hroud issue has nothing to do with science against religion but with

finding out what the right answer is. >or that reason he has shown his willingness to oen the doors of the

&(ford laboratory for another round of carbon dating, confident that the +GG test rests unchallenged.

%hat is e(actly where the battle begins. %here is an abundance of literature that has been roduced by

'hroud scientists and scholars, and scientists with no links to 'hroud studies as well, where the accuracy

of carbon dating, e$en in general, has been called into "uestion. But since a descrition of what has been

written in this conte(t is not within the scoe of this article the best source to learn what the contro$ersy

is all about is #an =ilson’s book. 3e mentions 1indow Man, initially dated by the British Museum to --

B?, &(ford to AD +--, and 3arwell to AD --. %he museum now says that he died between B? and

AD ++, the dating ha$ing been obtained on a range of samles in the late +G-s.



Lindow #an. $hotogra%h b" the author.

%his is of course a case where the dating is on water)logged tissue, which is roblematic, but so is the

linen cloth of the 'hroud. #t has already been ointed out that $icissitudes it has gone through may, in the

end, a$e the way to the conclusion that it really is unsuitable for carbon dating. 'uch a ossibility

makes historical research, which will deend largely on new findings, e$en more imortant and scientific

studies may also bring fresh news about the image)formation rocess.

%hese are things that will be discussed for a long time, so meanwhile, going back to the area of biblical

studies, we see J. P. Meier writing about “the true Jesus who had died rose in the fullness of his humanity

into the full resence of 6od.” %hat is a reasonable e(lanation without the need to go into details. But

Poe Benedict LC# goes further when he states that the !esurrection does not stand outside or abo$e

history. #t oints beyond history but has left footrints in history. =hether the %urin 'hroud is one of

those footrints remains to be seen.

Louis C. de Figueiredo - The Quest for Jesus in Shroud Research

Documents

Transcript of Louis C. de Figueiredo - The Quest for Jesus in Shroud Research