What technique was used to make the Last Supper. secrets

Biblical definition of the Last Supper.

The Last Supper is the traditional name for the last meal of Christ the Savior with the disciples. Its name is due to the fact that, due to the threat from the Sanhedrin, the Supper had to take place in secret. Its focus was the sacred act of establishing the New Testament, foretold by the prophet Jeremiah (Jer. 31:31), and the sacrament of the Eucharist, which, by the will of the Lord Himself, began to be celebrated by the Church in "remembrance" of Him. The evidence for the Last Supper is found in Matt. 26:17-35; Mk. 14:12-26; OK. 22:7-39; In. 13 - 14; 1 Cor. 11:23 - 25 and generally coincide with each other. The differences in the forecasters' stories are minor and concern only details. Text In. contains three essential features: a) it contains the farewell conversation of the Savior, which is absent from weather forecasters; b) in John. the Eucharist is not spoken of, but the washing of the feet is spoken of, which the weather forecasters do not have; c) In. emphasizes that the Last Supper took place “before the feast of the Passover,” while the weather forecasters refer it to “the first day of unleavened bread, when the lamb was to be slain,” that is, to the very day of the feast. The first difference is due to the general character of the 4th Gospel. It also cites great discourses of Christ in other places, which the weather forecasters do not have. The second is one of the most difficult passages in the Bible and has not yet been explained (there is a hypothesis according to which the Lord used to have sacred meals with His disciples and therefore John did not consider it necessary to describe the last meal). Be that as it may, the Eucharistic teaching in Jn. is: it is expressed in the words of Christ about the heavenly Bread (John 6).

On the origin of the Last Supper.

The question of the date and character of the Last Supper is as follows. Jesus Christ undoubtedly observed the Jewish holidays of His time, but at the same time showed that they receive their full meaning only from Himself and the fulfillment of His work, for example, with regard to the Feast of Tabernacles or Renewal, and especially Passover: He deliberately sealed the New Testament with His Passover sacrifice. With this new and final Passover, Christ also fulfilled the aspirations of the Feast of Atonement, for His blood gives access to the true sanctuary (Heb. 10:19) and to the great triumphant assembly in the heavenly Jerusalem. From now on, the true feast takes place in heaven. With palm branches in their hands, as for the Feast of Tabernacles (Rev. 7:9), the host of the elect, redeemed by the blood of the true Passover Lamb (5:8-14; 7:10-14), sings an ever new song to the glory of the Lamb and His Father . The Easter holiday has become an eternal heavenly holiday. Having reduced the plurality of Jewish holidays to an eschatological unity, the heavenly Pascha from now on gives a new meaning to the various holidays of the Church on earth. Unlike Jewish holidays, they are a remembrance of an event that took place once for all and has eternal value; but, like the Jewish, Christian holidays, they continue to depend on the circulation of the earth and the seasons, being at the same time connected with the main facts of the earthly life of Jesus Christ. If the Church must see to it that no excessive significance is attributed to her feasts, since they are only a shadow of the feast of the present, she nevertheless accepts their abundance. It centers the celebration on the Paschal Mystery, commemorated in the Eucharist, for which the community gathers on Sunday, the day of the Lord's Resurrection (Acts 20:7; Rev. 1:10). Being the beginning of the week (ending on Saturday), Sunday indicates the novelty of the Christian holiday, the only holiday whose radiance extends over the festive annual circle, which has Easter as its focus. The Church takes into account natural cycles, drawing wealth from the Jewish heritage, which she constantly actualizes through the unceasing appearance of Christ and directs to the mystery of the eternal heavenly feast.

The origin of the Lord's Supper is not as controversial as the genesis of baptism: it must, of course, be sought in the ministry of Jesus Christ, and, above all, in two features of this ministry: (a) in the fraternal meals of Jesus Christ and (b) in His last supper with the disciples. Jesus Christ was often a guest at meals (Mark 1:29 - 31, 14:3; Luke 7:36, 11:37, 14:1; John 2:1 - 11), and sometimes he himself arranged them ( Mark 2:15; Luke 15:1-2). This shows that He often shared a feast in the most "motley" company. Among the main indications of a very wide circle of His companions, the following fragments can be distinguished - (Luke 8:1 - 3, 24:33; Mark 6:32 - 44, 8:14; John 4:8, 31; 21:12 ). It is important to understand how much this meant to Jesus Christ and His contemporaries. In the eyes of the people of the East, the fellowship at the meal was a guarantee of peace, trust and brotherhood. Eating and drinking together meant living together. Therefore, for example, sharing a meal with "tax collectors", Jesus Christ thereby proclaimed to them God's salvation and the assurance of forgiveness. That is why the devout contemporaries of Jesus Christ resented the freedom of His behavior (Mark 2:16; Luke 15:2): a pious person could eat food only with the righteous, it seemed an axiom. But the feasts of Jesus Christ were distinguished precisely by their openness. They were a kind of invitation for those who needed grace, and not cult rites for a group of “friends”, who thereby separated themselves from their brethren. It is also important to note the eschatological significance of the common meals of Jesus Christ, which should be understood in the context of His proclamation. From the point of view of Jesus Christ, sharing a meal with Him meant looking forward to the messianic feast (Mark 2:19, 10:35-40; Matt. 22:1-10 / Luke 14:16-24; Matt. 25:10 ; Luke 22:30, compare Isaiah 25:6; 1 Enoch 62:14; 2 Var. 29:8). The last supper of Jesus Christ with the disciples was the final expression of that communal brotherhood which was an integral part of His mission. In particular, it clearly showed the nature of this mission as a mission of service (Luke 22:24-27, cf. John 13:1-20); the premonition of death came to the fore with a piercing nakedness (let us pay special attention to the through motif of the “chalice” - Mk. 10:38; Lk. 22:20; Mk. 14:36), and the eschatological note reached its highest sound, so that the supper itself became the coming triumph (Mark 14:25; Luke 22:16, 18 - probably a vow of fasting in view of the immediate proximity of the Kingdom).

Easter character of the Last Supper?

The Jewish Passover was celebrated on the 14th day of the spring month of Nisan. A festive meal (Heb. "SEDER") was held on the evening of the 14th day of the month of Nisan (according to some exegetes, if we are talking about Easter in 30 AD, then it coincided with April 6 of our calendar). According to John, the eve of Passover that year fell on Friday (13:29; 18:28), and the Last Supper was celebrated the day before (that is, on the evening of Nisan 13). But when reading weather forecasters, one gets the impression that the Last Supper took place directly on the evening of the Seder, that is, on Nisan 14.

So, was the Last Supper a Passover meal? There are different opinions on this issue. The circumstances of the meal testify in favor of an affirmative answer: Jerusalem, and not Bethany, night, wine, as well as explanatory words (Mark 14:17-18). On the other hand, the execution of Jesus on Easter day is difficult to imagine, and the most ancient traditions do not speak of the Easter nature of the meal. Perhaps the explanation is simple: Jesus gave the evening the character of a special Passover meal, or deliberately elevated the meaning of a meal that would otherwise have been ordinary. There are 5 most common hypotheses that explain this discrepancy.

1) Only the testimony of weather forecasters is reliable that the Last Supper was celebrated during the seder. The 4th Gospel does not give a historical chronology, but symbolically identifies the day of the Crucifixion with the day of the slaughter and eating of the Paschal lamb. This opinion, which devalues ​​the historicity of John's testimony, is shared by the main representatives of rationalism in biblical studies, as well as the liberal Protestant school of exegesis. 2) The order of events described in John is the most accurate. The Supper of Christ did not coincide with the Old Testament Passover. Only later, when the mystery of Christ as a sacrificial Lamb was comprehended, was the Eucharistic Supper identified with Paschal (Giaurov, Farrar, etc.). The weakness of this hypothesis is that it reduces the historical value of the unanimous testimony of the weather forecasters, who preserved the most ancient elements of the Gospel Tradition. 3) Differences between evangelists are imaginary. The Last Supper coincided with Easter. Chronological ambiguities in the texts are due to the lack of accurate information about the ancient order of the Seder. In the patristic period, Origen insisted on the Paschal character of the Last Supper, St. John Chrysostom, Rev. John of Damascus and others, and in modern times - Fr. Gorsky, Bogdashevsky, Glubokovsky, Buye. The rites of the ritual meal and Easter are set forth in the Talmudic treatises "Berakhot" and "Pesachim". Their comparison with the Last Supper confirms its Paschal character. “Christ,” writes L. Bouillet, “does not invent, but only applies a ritual that already exists and must continue.” 4) Jesus Christ, like the Essenes, did not adhere to the official calendar and therefore celebrated Easter earlier than was customary, for example, in the Pharisees and Sadducees circles (Jaubert, Danielou). Meanwhile, there are no indications in the Gospels that would confirm the hypothesis that Christ did not recognize the generally accepted calendar. But we know that on other occasions Christ never rejected the accepted church calendar. Moreover, there is no reason to bring Him closer to the Essenes. 5) There is a point of view according to which the Seder in the year of the Crucifixion, as John points out, was on Friday. The Savior preceded the festive meal with a special supper, at which he celebrated the Passover of the New Testament. It is possible that other people also celebrated the Seder in advance, since Passover coincided with Saturday (Chwolson). The forecasters had in mind not the day of eating the lamb, but the day of its slaughter, and this ceremony could be performed on the eve of the appointed time due to the large gathering of people. This hypothesis of a pre-Paschal in time, but Paschal in character, supper was defended by the archbishop. Filaret (Gumilevsky), archpriest. P. Alfeev, Dodd, ep. Cassian (Bezobrazov) and others.

According to Bishop Cassian (Bezobrazov), the problem of the chronology of the Last Supper is as follows: “All four evangelists pay great attention to the last Last Supper of Jesus with the disciples. But its date is determined in different ways, which is reflected in the construction of the chronology of the Passion. The difficulty lies in the fact that from the testimony of the synoptics it follows with certainty that the last supper of Jesus was the Passover Supper. The Jews slaughtered the Passover lamb in the month of Nisan, on the evening of the 14th day. On the 15th of Nisan, the week of unleavened bread began. Meanwhile, from Jn. It can be clearly deduced that when Jesus was brought to Pilate's trial, the Passover was yet to come, and the Jews had not yet eaten the Passover lamb. For John, Jesus Himself, whose bone was not broken, was the fulfillment of a type: the Old Testament Passover lamb. And the coming Sabbath was a great day, because it began the week of unleavened bread. In other words, unlike the weather forecasters, from Jn. it follows that Jesus died on the day when the Jews slaughtered and ate the Passover lamb, that is, the 14th of Nisan, and, therefore, His last supper with the disciples, which took place the day before, took place on the 13th of Nisan. The chronological contradiction between the synoptics and John can thus be expressed in the following form: according to the synoptics, the last supper is on the 14th of Nisan, the Crucifixion is on the 15th of Nisan; according to John, the last supper is on the 13th of Nisan, the crucifixion is on the 14th of Nisan. Liberal historians generally favor weather forecasters. It must be admitted that none of the solutions exhausts the question.

The origin and order of the Old Testament Passover. Reconstruction of the Last Supper.

Old Testament Easter is a spring holiday of nomadic and domestic life. Easter was originally a family holiday. It was celebrated at night, at the full moon on the spring equinox, on the 14th day of the month of Aviv or ears of corn (which received the young name "Nisan" after the captivity). A young animal born within the last year was sacrificed to JHWH to attract God's blessing to the flock. The victim was a lamb or a goat, male, having no "blemish"; none of his bones could be broken. His blood, as a sign of protection, was anointed on the jambs and the crossbar of the doors in each dwelling. Its meat was eaten at a fast-paced meal, the participants of which had to be in travel clothes. These features of nomadic and domestic life suggest a very ancient origin for Easter; it is possible that she was the sacrifice for which the Israelites sought permission from the Pharaoh in the wilderness; thus, it can be assumed that its origin was older than Moses and the Exodus from Egypt. But it received its final meaning at the time of the Exodus.

Despite the large volume of stories about Egyptian executions, in the Old Testament tradition they do not make sense in and of themselves. They are directed to the story of Easter night, in which they only find their goal and peak. This last fatal blow leads to what all other executions have failed to lead to. The pharaoh can no longer resist the power of JHWH. Even at night, he calls Moses and conjures him to leave his people as quickly as possible. The Israelites must go and serve their God as they wanted; they must also take their sheep and cows with them, and in the end they even ask for a blessing for themselves. JHWH subdued Pharaoh with His strong hand, as He had promised Moses in the beginning (Ex. 6:1). But along with this high point of the stories about the executions, another motive is revealed, which gives the story a special meaning, namely, the motive of sparing Israel. Actually, on Easter night, God's judgment takes place, which takes place over the whole country. “And this very night I will go through the land of Egypt and strike every firstborn in the land of Egypt, from man to cattle, and I will execute judgment on all the gods of Egypt. I am the Lord” (Ex. 12:12). JHWH will pass through the country to smite the Egyptians and allow the "destroyer" to enter into all the houses (12:13). But He will pass by the houses of the Israelites, sparing them (Passah). [The exact meaning of the verb "psh" (Ex. 12:13, 23, 27) from the context : "to pass by" or "to spare"]. The children of Israel are to slay the lamb and anoint with its blood the crossbeam and the doorposts of their houses. When the Lord sees blood on the beams and doorposts. He will not allow the destroyer to enter these houses. Ref. 12 contains the etiology (history of the cause) of the Passover holiday, which is still celebrated in Israel to commemorate the Exodus from Egypt. Its main elements are named in the priestly version of the story. Every family should have an unblemished lamb slain. “And they must take from the blood and anoint with it both the doorposts and the top bar of the doors of their houses” (12:7). Meat must be eaten at night, "as well as unleavened bread with bitter herbs" (12:8). And “this is how you should eat it: with your loins girded, with shoes on your feet and with a staff in your hand ... This is the Passover of the Lord” (12:11). [After the destruction of the temple and the end of the sacrificial cult, the Passover lambs are no longer slaughtered. But the fried leg of lamb reminds of this custom even now during the Passover meal. The Passover ritual was associated in Canaan with the feast of Mazzot, the ancient Eastern harvest festival, and in addition to eating the Passover lamb, as well as unleavened bread - matzah. This is also mentioned in 12:15-20]. Where do the strange motifs of the Paschal tradition come from? From an ancient pastoral custom practiced in Israel's nomadic past. The sacrifice of the firstborn of small livestock was a very ancient custom among wandering nomads. During the transition from winter to summer pasture and for the sake of the danger of a dry summer, it was recommended to make a sacrifice to protect against evil forces. Subsequently, this sacrifice was brought into connection with the story of the Exodus. In this regard, we are no longer talking about regular departure for summer pastures and not about protection from emerging dangers. Now we are talking about a one-time departure from Egyptian slavery. Israel, who on the night of the Exodus celebrated the Passover in fear and haste, and took with them unleavened bread for food on the road, is saved from the destruction that has broken out over the whole country. His exodus takes place under the sign of judgment and mercy. Israel nearly perished together in the great chastisement. But by the gracious passage of JHWH he was spared and saved. So over the way of the people to freedom, not only stands the power of JHWH, which is stronger than the pharaoh and all the gods of the Egyptians. This path is also marked from the very beginning by God's grace-filled mercy. The annual Passover reminds us of this, and Israel must remember this “from generation to generation” (Ex. 12:14).

The exodus from Egypt for the Jews was supposed to be the beginning of a new life, since that time the enslaved people were given the opportunity for broad state development and spiritual and moral improvement. Therefore, the month of the Jews' departure from Egypt was, by the will of God, to be the first month of the year for the future. This month, called below (13:4) “Aviv” (Slavic “new fruits”, that is, the month of ears), later, after the Babylonian captivity, received the name Nisan (the month of flowers), it corresponds to our March-April. Indeed, in subsequent times, the sacred year of the Jews began from this month, but at the same time, the Jews preserved a different account of months for the civil year, which began from the very month "tiori", corresponding to our September-October. The feast of Pascha is called the eternal institution in the sense that it had to take place until the end of the Old Testament times. Moreover, it is eternal in its proper sense, for the New Testament Passover, typified by the Passover lamb, will be celebrated forever. The sacrifice of the Paschal lamb can be considered in the closest historical sense - in relation to the Jews and in a spiritually mysterious transforming sense - in a series of Old Testament veiled indications of the dispensation of our salvation, accomplished by the Lord Jesus Christ.

Over time, another holiday merged with Easter, originally different from it, but close to it in its spring term: Unleavened bread (Ex. 12:15 - 20). Passover is celebrated on the 14th day of the month of Nisan; Unleavened bread is set from the 15th to the 21st. Unleavened loaves are included in the firstfruits offering (Lev. 23:5-14); the cleansing of old leaven is a rite of purity and annual renewal, the origin of which is debatable and may be nomadic and agricultural. Be that as it may, Israelite tradition would also link this rite to the Exodus from Egypt. Now he recalls the haste of leaving, so quick that the Israelites had to carry away their dough before it was sour (Ex. 12:34). In the liturgical calendars, Pascha and Unleavened Bread sometimes differ (Lev. 23:5-8; Ezra 6:19-22), sometimes they merge (Deut. 16:1-8). In any case, Easter every year brings the redemption of the exodus to the present, and this deep meaning of the holiday is felt at the most important stages in the history of Israel: Sinai (Numbers 9) and upon entering Canaan (Josh. 5); under the reforms of Hezekiah about 716 and Josiah about 622; during the restoration after captivity in 515 (Ezr. 6:19 - 22). The deliverance from the Egyptian yoke begins each time Israel is subjected to another bondage. While under the Assyrian yoke, around the year 710, Isaiah welcomes the liberation as the Passover night (30:29), during which God will spare ("Passover") Jerusalem (31:5); a hundred years later, Jeremiah celebrates the release of the captives in 721 as a new exodus (Jer. 31:2-21) and even as the anniversary of the first exodus: “Behold, I will bring, says the Lord, the children of Israel to the feast of the Passover!” (Jer. 31:8). Under the Babylonian yoke, Jeremiah claims that the return of the forcibly displaced in 597 will surpass the exodus that lives in Israel's memory (Jer. 23:7); DeuteroIsaiah heralds the return from captivity as the final outcome, which will eclipse the ancient one: the gathering of the scattered will be the work of the Lamb-Child. Who will become a light for the pagan nations and, together with the Paschal lamb, will serve as an image of the coming Savior.

Thus, over the centuries, the Passover ritual has evolved. Refinements and transformations have taken place. The most important of these are the innovations of Deuteronomy, which turned the ancient family celebration into a temple festival (Deut. 16:1-8). It may be that some beginning of the implementation of this legislation was made under Hezekiah; in any case, under Isaiah it is translated into reality. Easter follows a general centralization of cult to which its rite adapts itself; blood is poured on the altar; Priests and Levites become the main actors in this sacred rite. After the captivity, Passover becomes a feast, the failure to observe which can lead to a real excommunication for the Jews (Num. 9:13); all the circumcised, and only they, must participate in it (Ex. 12:43-49); if necessary, it can be postponed for one month. These refinements of priestly legislation establish a legal order that no longer changes. Outside of Jerusalem, of course, Easter continues to be celebrated here and there in the family circle; so it certainly is in the Jewish colony at Elephantine, in Egypt, according to one document of 419. But the slaughter of the Passover lamb is gradually excluded from these private celebrations, which are now eclipsed by the Jerusalem celebration. On Pascha, one of the main pilgrimages of the liturgical year began to take place. In Judaism, Easter takes on a very rich meaning, expressed in the Targum of Ex. 12:42: Israel's deliverance from slavery is likened to the world being pulled out of chaos, Isaac delivered from sacrifice, and mankind delivered from their plight by the awaited Messiah.

The Talmud knows the "Egyptian Passover" and the "Passover of subsequent generations", which took place not one day, but seven. According to this terminology, Passover joined the days of unleavened bread, and, therefore, there were not 7, but 8 of them. Then the elder of the family already on the evening of the 13th of Nisan with lamps went around the dwelling, eliminating all leaven, which was burned on the morning of the 14th. The Passover feast begins in the evening (in Exodus 12:6 literally “between two evenings”: the first evening was considered the time when the sun began to set, and the second evening was total darkness). The Supper was to be a secret, only in the company of the disciples. Therefore, in the gospel presentation, the householder is not named in detail, but only the disciples are sent "to such and such." The celebration in the Holy City of Jerusalem was considered honorary: Josephus Flavius ​​speaks of the number of over 250 thousand lambs that were slaughtered that day. The rooms could accommodate several phratries, each with at least 10 people. But the Savior wants to spend the supper only in the circle of His close disciples. Therefore, the text of Mk. 14:14 in some manuscripts (for example, Sinai) has a specification of the place of the Supper: "My upper room." The preparation for the Supper probably took place on the 14th. Between 3 and 6 o'clock the apostles bought a paschal lamb in the courtyard of the temple and slaughtered it themselves. More about this.

What preparations did the Jew make for the Passover? First, the ritual of searching for leaven. Before the beginning of the Passover, the smallest pieces of leaven had to be removed from the house, because the first Passover in Egypt (Ex. 12) was eaten with unleavened bread. In Egypt, it was baked because it was much faster than a loaf of bread made from sour yeast dough, and the first Passover, the Passover of deliverance from Egyptian captivity, had to be eaten in a hurry, being ready for a long journey. In addition, leaven, yeast, was a symbol of decay, decay. Leaven, yeast is a fermented dough, and the Jews equated fermentation with decomposition, and therefore leaven symbolized rottenness, decomposition. And on the day before the onset of Easter, the owner of the house took a lit candle and performed a ritual - he searched the house in search of leaven and, before starting the search, said this prayer: “Blessed are You, Jehovah, our God, King of the Universe, who sanctified us with His covenants and bequeathed we should remove the leaven." At the end of the rite of search, the owner of the house said: “All the leaven that I have, the one that I saw, and the one that I did not see, let it not be there, let it be considered the dust of the earth.” Further, in the afternoon on the day before Passover, the Passover lamb was sacrificed. Everyone gathered at the temple, and each head of the family, who participated in the divine service, sacrificed his own lamb, making, as it were, his own sacrifice. The Jews believed that all blood was offered as a sacrifice to God, because in their eyes blood meant life. This was a perfectly reasonable way of looking at things, because as a wounded person or animal bleeds, so does his life. And therefore, everyone who took part in worship in the temple slaughtered his own lamb. Between the participants in the service and the altar stood two long rows of priests with a golden or silver bowl in their hands. As one cut the lamb's throat, the other collected its blood into one of these vessels and passed it along the line until the vessel reached the priest standing at the very end, who splashed the blood onto the altar. After that, the carcass of the lamb was skinned, the skin was removed from it, the entrails and fat were removed, because they were an integral part of the sacrifice, and the carcass was returned to the one who made the sacrifice. If the figures given by Josephus Flavius ​​are more or less correct, and more than a quarter of a million lambs were sacrificed, then it is even difficult to imagine the scene in the temple and the state of the blood-drenched altar. The lamb was carried home to be roasted. It could not be boiled; nothing was to touch it, not even the walls of the cauldron; it was to be roasted over an open fire on a pomegranate skewer. The skewer passed through the entire carcass of the lamb - from the throat to the anus. He was fried whole, with head and legs and even with a tail.

The following four items were also needed for the holiday. 1. A bowl of salt water was to be placed on the table in memory of the tears shed during Egyptian slavery, and the salty waters of the Red (Red) Sea, through which God miraculously led them. 2. It was necessary to prepare a set of bitter herbs - horseradish, chicory, endive chicory, lettuce and others. It was also supposed to remind them of the bitterness of slavery and of the bunch of hyssop used to apply lamb's blood to the doorposts and lintels. 3. What was needed was Haroset paste, made from apples, dates, pomegranates and nuts. It was supposed to remind them of the clay from which they were supposed to make bricks in Egypt, and in this paste there were branches of cinnamon, symbolizing the straw used in the manufacture of bricks. 4. And finally, four cups of wine were needed. They were to remind the Jews of the four promises in Ex. 6.6. 7: “I will bring you out from under the yoke of the Egyptians, and I will deliver you from their bondage, and I will save you with an outstretched arm and with great judgments. And I will take you to be my people, and I will be your God.” These were the preparations to be made on Thursday morning and afternoon. All this the disciples prepared; and at any time after six o'clock in the evening, that is, when Friday, Nisan 15, began, guests could sit down at the table.

The custom of the Old Testament law required eating the "supper" standing (Ex. 12:11 - "Eat it like this: let your loins be girded, your shoes on your feet and your staffs in your hands, and eat it with haste: this is the Passover of the Lord ”), but in the time of Jesus Christ, the tradition of reclining was already established. When it got dark, the Savior through the Mount of Olives came to Jerusalem with 12 apostles. The order of prayers, rituals, dishes seems to be approximately the same.

1. The first bowl, mixed with water. The head of the family pronounces the Kiddush (consecration) prayer. Thanksgiving over wine and thanksgiving of the feast are read. In the Mishnah, such thanksgivings are given, for example: (blessing over wine) - “Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the universe, who created the fruit of the vine ...”; (over bread) - “Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the universe, bringing bread out of the earth ...”; (blessing of the holiday) - "Blessed ... who chose us from all peoples, and exalted us above all languages, and sanctified us with his commandments."
2. Washing of hands (it was performed three times and at different times).
3. The head of the family soaks the bitter herbs in "solilo", the so-called "charoset" - a seasoning made from almonds, nuts, figs and sweet fruits - and serves them to other members of the family.
4. he breaks one of the unleavened bread (the middle of the three), half of which he sets aside until the end of the supper; this half is "afigomon". A dish with broken unleavened bread (without aphigomon) was raised, and it was said: "This is the bread of suffering, which our fathers ate in the land of Egypt." The mystical interpretations of this in rabbinic literature are interesting. After raising the bread, the head of the family puts both hands on both breads, which, according to the mysterious interpretation of the sacred tetragram of the name of God, means a knife, bread and hands.
5. The second bowl is filled. Junior asks how this night is different from other nights.
6. The head of the family tells the story of slavery and the exodus from Egypt according to the Bible.
7. The second cup rises: "we must give thanks, praise, glorify ...". The bowl went down and up again.
8. Singing the first half of Hallel (Psalms 112:1 - 113:8). Moreover, according to Rabbi Shammai, they sang only Psalm 112, while according to Rabbi Gamaliel, they continued singing until 113:8.
9. Drank a second cup
10. Hand washing.
11. Festive eating: the head of the family served portions of unleavened bread, bitter herbs dipped in charoset, and the Passover lamb.
12. The remainder of Aphigomon was separated.
13. The third bowl with the after-meal prayer.
14. Singing the second part of Hallel (Psalms 115-118).
15. The fourth bowl is filled.
16. At will, a fifth cup was added with the singing of Psalm 135.
17. Two short prayers were offered. “All Your works will praise You, O Lord our God. And Thy saints, the righteous, who proclaim Thy praise, and all Thy people, the house of Israel, may they praise and bless and glorify and exalt and honor and sanctify and give the kingdom to Thy name, O God our King. For it is good to praise You, and it is joyful to sing the praises of Your name, for You are God from eternity to eternity.” “The breath of all living things will praise Your name, O Lord our God, and the spirit of all flesh will always glorify and magnify Your glory, O God our King. For from eternity to eternity You are God, and we have no King, Redeemer or Savior but You.”

Thus ended the Easter holiday. If the meal at which Jesus and His disciples sat was the Passover, then Jesus spoke of Himself and meant Himself under points 12 and 13, and, having sung the psalm given under point 16, they all hastened to the Mount of Olives. Jesus Christ wanted to imprint this action in the memory of His disciples. Earlier Jewish prophets resorted to symbolic, dramatized actions when they felt that words were not having the desired effect. They understood that words could soon be forgotten, and actions would be imprinted in the minds. Jesus Christ did the same, combining this dramatized action with the ancient feast of His people in order to imprint everything even more strongly in the minds of people.

From the entire order of the Jewish Paschal rite and its comparison with the Last Supper of the Savior, the following conclusions can be drawn. Christ gave the Eucharistic chalice after supper (1 Corinthians 11:25). Christ celebrated the lawful supper. The Evangelists do not say anything about the course of the lawful supper, they do not mention the lamb, but this is implied. Ev. Luke mentions two bowls, while the other evangelists only speak of one. The first cup of the Evangelist Luke (22:17) is an Old Testament cup, maybe the first, or maybe the second. The cup from 22:20 is the Eucharistic cup, the cup of blessing. The evangelists are silent about the fourth and fifth (arbitrary) ones. They talk about Hallel singing “having sung, let us go” (Matt.; Mk.). The bread mentioned by the evangelists was probably the so-called "afigomon". For the second cup "they thanked, praised, glorified." The last indication is important for the further development of the text of the Eucharistic prayers. Researcher Freer finds that the Last Supper was Paschal in character, intent, and general resemblance rather than in the normal details of time and rite.

So, establishing the sacrament of the Eucharist, the Lord Jesus Christ read the blessing over the bread (according to Matthew and Mark, according to Luke - thanksgiving) and thanksgiving over the cup (according to Matthew and Mark), thereby making prayer over the gifts an integral part of the Eucharistic rite . Various assumptions were made about the content of what the Savior said, depending on what the Last Supper itself was considered to be: an Easter meal (Origen, St. John Chrysostom, St. Andrew of Crete; from modern authors - Archpriests A. Gorsky, N. Glubokovsky, F Probst, G. Bikkel, I. Karabinov, U. Freer, I. Jungmann, Archimandrite Cyprian (Kern), I. Jeremias, L. Ligier, N. D. Uspensky, etc.) or a traditional fraternal meal - “khavurot "(Clement of Alexandria, schmar. Hippolytus of Rome; from modern authors - G. Dike, P. Trembelas). If the Last Supper was the celebration of the Jewish Passover, then the blessings over the bread and the chalice pronounced by Christ may have mostly been in line with the traditional text of the Passover Seder; if it is considered a fraternal meal, then these words could be similar to table blessings recorded in Talmudic Judaism. But the stable texts of the haggadah and table blessings in Iv. did not yet exist, finally, it is quite possible that the Lord Jesus Christ could replace the traditional words of blessings with His own.

In connection with the order of the celebration of the Old Testament and Paschal Supper, the question may also arise about the order of the places occupied by the apostles during the last meal with the Lord. The paucity of positive data in the New Testament Revelation does not allow us to say anything definite on this issue. In order to preserve strictly historical truth, we must confine ourselves to the unconditional indications of the evangelists why all the free fortune-telling and assumptions of some writers should simply be rejected. As has already been pointed out, it was supposed to lie down at the time of Christ. The Egyptian custom of "exodus" to eat supper standing has already degenerated. Reclining by the Greeks is borrowed from the Persians. The Romans adopted this custom from the Greeks. Only the Cretans dined sitting. As you know, the evangelists did not leave us a picture of the seniority of the places occupied by the apostles. That such a custom of taking places in a certain sequence by the Jews, however, was observed, is clear from the parable offered by the Lord about this (Luke 14: 7 - 11). Reclined on the left elbow to have a free right hand. They lay, therefore, so to speak, "at the back of each other's head." Naturally, the eldest, or favorite relative, or student should have been closer to the head of the phratry. The Evangelists, without saying anything about the ranks at this meal, nevertheless allow us to assume from the course of the narrative that the three disciples are closest to the Savior: John, Peter and Judas the Betrayer. The most authoritative and historically correct Lagrange for us assumes this; John at the right hand of the Lord; Peter, probably at the right hand of John; Judas is close to the Lord, at the head of another row of reclining disciples, and so that he can easily leave without disturbing anyone. All assumptions about other places he considers simply idle and vain. Approximately Meshler also speaks, emphasizing that Judas had to be in close proximity to the Savior so that the Lord could give him a piece dipped in salt.

Jesus deliberately sealed the New Testament with His Passover sacrifice. With this new and final Passover, Christ also fulfilled the aspirations of the Feast of Atonement, for His blood gives access to the true sanctuary (Heb. 10:19) and to the great triumphant assembly in the heavenly Jerusalem. From now on, the true feast takes place in heaven. With palm branches in their hands, as for the Feast of Tabernacles (Rev. 7:9), the host of the elect, redeemed by the blood of the true Passover Lamb (5:8-14; 7:10-14), sings an ever new song to the glory of the Lamb and His Father . The Easter holiday has become an eternal heavenly holiday. Having reduced the plurality of Jewish holidays to an eschatological unity, the heavenly Pascha from now on gives a new meaning to the various holidays of the Church on earth. Unlike Jewish holidays, they are a remembrance of an event that took place once for all and has eternal value; but, like the Jewish, Christian holidays, they continue to depend on the circulation of the earth and the seasons, being at the same time connected with the main facts of the earthly life of Jesus Christ. If the Church must see to it that no excessive significance is attributed to her feasts, since they are only a shadow of the feast of the present, she nevertheless accepts their abundance. It centers the celebration on the Paschal Mystery, commemorated in the Eucharist, for which the community gathers on Sunday, the day of the Lord's Resurrection (Acts 20:7; Rev. 1:10). Being the beginning of the week (ending on Saturday), Sunday indicates the novelty of the Christian holiday, the only holiday whose radiance extends over the festive annual circle, which has Easter as its focus. The Church takes into account natural cycles, drawing wealth from the Jewish heritage, which she constantly actualizes through the unceasing appearance of Christ and directs to the mystery of the eternal heavenly feast.

Holy Apostle Paul on the Last Supper.

Paul only talks about the Lord's Supper in 1 Corinthians 10:14-22 and 11:17-34. But there is a lot of information in these texts. The continuity with inherited tradition is most evident on three points. Paul refers to the tradition, substantiating his understanding of the supper (1 Cor. 11:23-25). This tradition, which ultimately goes back to the last Supper of Jesus with His disciples, Paul had to receive from those who had previously believed, even if the authority of the tradition for Paul is based on the fact that the apostle received him "from the Lord." The eschatological aspect of the supper remains in force - "... until He comes" (1 Cor. 11:26). The Supper remains the meal of brotherhood. In 1 Cor. 10:18 - 22 Paul makes a double comparison of the Lord's Supper with the sacrificial meal of the Israelite cult (Lev. 7:6, 15) and with the feast in the pagan temple, and the basis of the comparison is the feeling of community expressed by all meals ("communists", "participants" - 10:18, 20). And from 1 Cor. 11:17-34 it is clear that the Lord's Supper was served at the table.

The relationship between the fraternal meal and the explanatory words over bread and wine became somewhat more distinct. The communion of bread and wine separates and shifts towards the end of the meal. Of course, the available data are not sufficient for a confident reconstruction of the overall picture, but it seems that the rich Corinthian Christians came with their food in advance, while the poor (slaves) could usually arrive only at the time of the Lord's Supper itself (11:21, 33). Related to this are the warnings of 11:27, 29: "does not discern the body" (11:29) probably means that a person eats and drinks without showing brotherly fellowship with the poor and weak; “guilty of the body and blood of the Lord” is he who sins against a weaker brother (repeat of what was said in 8:11-12). Although the eschatological motif still resonates, the retrospective reference to the death of Jesus in 11:26 is more pronounced. Here, too, a shift in emphasis is evident, from the fraternal meal, which generally served as a symbol of the Messianic feast, to the Lord's Supper itself, which heralds the death of Jesus.

Textual Traditions of the Explanatory Words of Jesus Christ at the Last Supper.

What we now call the liturgy was the result of the convergence or harmonization of a number of different traditions. Various types of meals are known, each of which affected the development of the Lord's Supper. Fraternal meal of the Jerusalem church, which probably used only bread without wine. The annual Passover-type meal, with bread and wine, bread either at the beginning (as at a regular meal) or in the middle (as at the Passover meal), and wine at the end of it (1 Cor. 11:25 - “after supper”) . A full meal, at which first the bowls were shared, and then the bread - this is implied in 1 Cor. 10:16, in Luke's short text (with the omission of Luke 22:19). Textual lore also reflects the diversity of forms and the development of practice. There are at least two versions of the textual tradition of the explanatory words of the Last Supper. A) Mk. 14:22-24/Matt. 26:26-28: " This is my body; This is my covenant blood shed for many". B) 1 Cor. 11:24-25/Luke. 22:19 - 20: " This is my body (for you); This cup is a (new) covenant in my blood (poured out for you)».

In the phrase pronounced over the bread, the words "for you" in tradition "B" are probably of a later origin - they do not say this in Aramaic, but they are absent in tradition "A", and by type such an expression may well be a liturgical additive . The differences in the second sentence are more interesting: in tradition A, the emphasis is on blood, in tradition B, on the covenant. In this case Tradition "B" is probably the earlier one: the expression "My blood of the covenant" is grammatically difficult to trace back to the Hebrew or Aramaic original; besides, drinking blood for the Jews was considered an act of disgust (Lev. 17:10-14; Acts 15:20, 29), and the close parallelism of both phrases in tradition "A" probably formed as a result of liturgical use. Considering that the phrases above the bread and above the bowl were originally pronounced at different moments of the meal, it should most likely be recognized that the wording of the second phrase was brought into line with the wording of the first only when the bread and wine were separated into a special ritual at the end of the meal. . If, however, we consider the earlier tradition "A", then it is very difficult to explain why the originally parallel formulations diverged. It seems that in the earlier form of the second phrase (over the wine, or more accurately over the cup), the emphasis was on "covenant", which corresponds to the eschatological character of the Last Supper. The expression "in my blood" may be a later addition, but its meaning was in any case implied: the covenant was established by sacrifice, and Jesus Christ saw this necessary sacrifice in His approaching death (cf. Ex. 24:8; Heb. 9:20; Luke 12:49-50). In the expression "poured out for..." the sacrificial motive is obvious. So we have a twofold tradition of the second explanatory phrase. The first tradition interprets the Last Supper in terms of the New Testament. The former fraternal meals of Jesus Christ were signs of the Messianic feast of the coming Kingdom; at the last of these meals, the imagery changes, now it is about the covenant, and the meal foreshadows the image of the establishment of this covenant and the coming of the Kingdom - the death of Jesus as a fiery baptism, as the fulfillment of the messianic disasters predicted by the Baptist. But the emphasis is on the covenant; the cup is the cup of promise about what will happen after His death (Luke 22:18 / Mark 14:25); the eschatological sound drowns out the soteriological. This is the form of tradition that most likely goes straight back to Jesus himself, and its persistence seems to reflect the continuing eschatological orientation of the meal in the congregations in which these words were reproduced. Another tradition is much more focused on the death of Jesus as such, with the dominant soteriological note. The content is preserved, the emphasis of the tradition changes, which probably reflects the early stage of development of the Lord's Supper as a separate phenomenon with an appeal rather back to accomplished redemption than forward to the eschatological feast. In In. 6:53-56, perhaps reflecting a third tradition, in which the first explanatory phrase read: "This is my flesh" (instead of "this is my body"). The existence of such a variant of the tradition is clearly confirmed by Ignatius (Philad. 4:1; Smyrn. 6:2), although it could have developed later, as a counterbalance to docetic ideas about Christ.

Conclusion.

The symbolism of the Last Supper and the Eucharist is closely connected with universal religious symbols and traditions of the Old Testament. Since ancient times, almost all peoples have practiced sacred fraternal meals, which marked the unity of people among themselves and with the Divine. There were similar meals in the Judaism of the intertestamental period (prayer meals of the communities, “HAVUROT”, suppers with members of the community of Qumran). In laying the foundation for the central sacrament of His Church, Christ rests on this centuries-old tradition. Ancient ritual meals in paganism and the Old Testament, as a rule, were an integral part of sacrificial rites. The sacrificial meal signified unity with the Divine and the union between the participants in the meal. The blood of the sacrifice meant in the Old Testament life, the right to dispose of which belongs only to God (hence the prohibition of eating blood). At the conclusion of the Covenant, the members of the community were sprinkled with the blood of the victim, which made them half-brothers, bound by one life. At the conclusion of the New Testament, the Lord Himself is the Sacrifice. He unites the Church by giving Himself, His Flesh and Blood, to the people. At the Last Supper, the sacred meal of the presence of God, the unity of Christ with the faithful, is established, which must continue until the end of history. “Every time,” says Rep. Paul, “when you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (1 Cor. 11:26). The Paschal sacrificial lamb, the Paschal loaves, the blessing of the chalice reminded in the Old Testament of the salvation of God's people in the days of the Exodus. But it was not just a historical memory, but the actualization of a soteriological mystery (Mishnah Pesachim, X, 5). In the same way, the covenant of Christ (“do this in remembrance of me”) meant not only the memory of the past, but the real, everlasting presence of the Savior in the Church. The Eucharist has for centuries been the link between the Last Supper and the Parousia, filling the life of the faithful with the Spirit of Christ. Just as in eating a person partakes of the forces of nature that support his life, so in the Eucharistic meal the members of the Church partake of Christ, forming through Him and in Him one body and one soul. The Apostle Paul in 1 Cor. 10:18-22 makes a double comparison of the Lord's Supper with the sacrificial meal of the Israelite cult Lev. 7:6 and with the feast in the pagan temple, and the basis of comparison is the sense of community expressed by all meals. Men A., archpriest. "Isagogy. Old Testament". Electronic version. www.alexandrmen.ru (alexandrmen.libfl.ru)

The Last Supper is, of course, one of the most mysterious works of the genius Leonardo da Vinci, with which only his Gioconda can compete in terms of the number of rumors and conjectures.

After the publication of the novel The Da Vinci Code, the fresco decorating the refectory of the Milanese Dominican monastery of Santa Maria delle Grazie (Chiesa e Convento Domenicano di Santa Maria delle Grazie) attracted the attention of not only art history researchers, but also lovers of all kinds of conspiracy theories. . In today's article, I will try to answer the most popular questions regarding the "Last Supper" by Leonardo da Vinci.

1. WHAT IS THE LAST SUPPER BY LEONARDO CORRECTLY?

Surprisingly, the “Last Supper” only in the Russian version has such a name, in the languages ​​​​of other countries both the biblical event depicted on the fresco by Leonardo, and the fresco itself has a much less poetic, but very capacious name “The Last Supper”, that is, Ultima Cena in Italian or The Last Supper in English. In principle, the name more accurately reflects the essence of what is happening on the wall painting, because before us is not a secret meeting of conspirators, but the last supper of Christ with the apostles. The second name of the fresco in Italian is Il Cenacolo, which simply translates as “refectory”.

2. HOW DID THE IDEA OF THE LAST SUPPER COME TOGETHER?

Before answering this question, it is necessary to make some clarity about the laws under which the art market lived in the fifteenth century. In fact, the free art market did not exist then, artists, as well as sculptors, worked only if they received an order from rich and influential families or from the Vatican. As you know, Leonardo da Vinci began his career in Florence, many believe that he had to leave the city because of accusations of homosexuality, but, in fact, everything was most likely much more prosaic. It's just that Leonardo had a very strong competitor in Florence - Michelangelo, who enjoyed the great favor of Lorenzo de Medici the Magnificent and took all the most interesting orders for himself. Leonardo arrived in Milan at the invitation of Ludovico Sforza and stayed in Lombardy for 17 years.

Pictured: Ludovico Sforza and Beatrice d'Este

All these years, da Vinci not only made art, but also designed his famous military vehicles, strong and light bridges and even mills, and was also the artistic director of public events. For example, it was Leonardo da Vinci who organized the wedding of Bianca Maria Sforza (Ludovico's niece) with Emperor Maximilian I of Innsbruck, and, of course, he also arranged the wedding of Ludovico Sforza himself with the young Beatrice d'Este - one of the most beautiful princesses of the Italian Renaissance. Beatrice d'Este was from a wealthy Ferrara, and her younger brother. The princess was well educated, her husband idolized her not only for her amazing beauty, but also for her sharp mind, and, in addition, contemporaries noted that Beatrice was a very energetic person, she took an active part in public affairs and patronized artists.

In the photo: Santa Maria delle Grazie (Chiesa e Convento Domenicano di Santa Maria delle Grazie)

It is believed that the idea to decorate the refectory of the monastery of Santa Maria delle Grazie with a painting on the theme of the last supper of Christ with the apostles belongs to her. The choice of Beatrice fell on this Dominican monastery for one simple reason - the monastery church was, by the standards of the fifteenth century, a structure that surpassed the imaginations of the people of that time, so the refectory of the monastery deserved to be decorated by the hand of the master. Unfortunately, Beatrice d'Este herself never saw the Last Supper fresco, she died in childbirth at a very young age, she was only 22 years old.

3. FOR HOW MANY YEARS LEONARDO DA VINCI WROTE "THE LAST SUPPER"?

There is no correct answer to this question, it is generally accepted that work on the painting began in 1495, went on intermittently, and Leonardo finished around 1498, that is, the year after the death of Beatrice d'Este. However, since the archives of the monastery were destroyed, the exact date of the start of work on the fresco is unknown, one can only assume that it could not have begun before 1491, since Beatrice and Ludovico Sforza were married in this year, and, if we focus on the few documents that have come down to our days, then, judging by them, the painting was at the final stage already in 1497.

4. IS THE LAST SUPPER BY LEONARDO DA VINCI A FRESCO IN THE STRICT UNDERSTANDING OF THIS TERM?

No, strictly speaking, it is not. The fact is that this type of painting implies that the artist must write quickly, that is, work on wet plaster and immediately on a clean copy. For Leonardo, who was very meticulous and did not recognize the work right away, this was completely unacceptable, so da Vinci invented a special primer from resin, gabs and mastic and painted The Last Supper dry. On the one hand, he was able to make numerous changes to the painting, and on the other hand, it was precisely because of the painting on a dry surface that the canvas began to collapse very quickly.

5. WHAT IS THE MOMENT DESCRIBED AT LEONARDO'S LAST SUPPER?

The moment when Christ says that one of the disciples will betray him, the focus of the artist's attention is the reaction of the disciples to his words.

6. WHO SITS AT THE RIGHT HAND OF CHRIST: THE APOSTLE JOHN OR MARY MAGDALENE?

There is no unequivocal answer to this question, the rule strictly works here, whoever believes in what he sees. Moreover, the current state of the "Last Supper" is very far from what the contemporaries of da Vinci saw as a fresco. But, it is worth saying, the figure on the right hand of Christ did not surprise and did not outrage Leonardo's contemporaries. The fact is that on the frescoes on the theme of the Last Supper, the figure on the right hand of Christ has always been very feminine; Maurizio.

In the photo: The Last Supper in the Basilica of San Maurizio

Here, the figure in the same position again looks very feminine, in a word, it turns out one of two things: either all the artists of Milan were in a secret conspiracy and depicted Mary Magdalene at the Last Supper, or it’s just an artistic tradition to depict John as a feminine young man. Decide for yourself.

7. WHAT IS THE LAST SUPPER INNOVATION?

First of all, in realism. The fact is that when creating his masterpiece, Leonardo decided to move away from the canons of biblical painting that existed at that time, he wanted to achieve such an effect that the monks who dined in the hall physically felt the presence of the Savior. That is why all household items are written off from those items that were in the everyday life of the monks of the Dominican monastery: the same tables at which Leonardo's contemporaries ate, the same utensils, the same dishes, yes, whatever, even the landscape outside the window - resembles the view from the windows refectory as it was in the fifteenth century.

In the photo: a mirror image of the "Last Supper"

But that is not all! The fact is that the rays of light on the fresco are a continuation of the real sunlight that fell into the windows of the refectory, in many places of the painting there is a golden section, and due to the fact that Leonardo was able to correctly reproduce the depth of the perspective, the fresco after completion of the work was voluminous, that is, in fact, it was made with a 3D effect. Unfortunately, now you can see this effect only from one point of the hall, the coordinates of the desired point: 9 meters deep into the hall from the fresco and about 3 meters above the current floor level.

8. WITH WHOM LEONARDO WROTE CHRIST, JUDAS AND OTHER FRESCO CHARACTERS?

All the characters on the fresco were painted from Leonardo's contemporaries, they say that the artist constantly walked the streets of Milan and looked for suitable characters, which even caused displeasure of the abbot of the monastery, who considered that the artist did not spend enough time at work. As a result, Leonardo informed the abbot that if he did not stop bothering him, then the portrait of Judas would be painted from him. The threat had an effect, and the rector of the maestro did not interfere anymore. For the image of Judas, the artist could not find a type for a very long time until he met a suitable person on the streets of Milan.

Judas on the fresco "The Last Supper"

When Leonardo brought an extra to his studio, it turned out that the same person had posed for da Vinci for the image of Christ a few years earlier, just then he sang in the church choir and looked completely different. What a cruel irony! In the light of this information, the well-known historical anecdote that the man from whom Leonardo wrote Judas told everyone that he was depicted at the Last Supper in the image of Christ takes on a completely different meaning.

9. IS THERE A PORTRAIT OF LEONARDO HIMSELF ON THE FRESCO?

There is a theory that there is also a self-portrait of Leonardo on The Last Supper, supposedly the artist is present on the fresco in the image of the Apostle Thaddeus - this is the second figure on the right.

Image of the Apostle Thaddeus on the fresco and portraits of Leonardo da Vinci

The truth of this statement is still in question, but the analysis of Leonardo's portraits clearly demonstrates a strong external resemblance to the image on the fresco.

10. HOW IS THE LAST SUPPER AND THE NUMBER 3 RELATED?

Another mystery of the Last Supper is the constantly repeating number 3: there are three windows on the fresco, the apostles are arranged in groups of three, even the contours of the figure of Jesus resemble a triangle. And, I must say, this is not at all accidental, because the number 3 constantly appears in the New Testament. It's not just about the Holy Trinity: God the Father, God the Son and the Holy Spirit, the number 3 goes through the whole description of the earthly ministry of Jesus.

Three wise men brought gifts to the born Jesus in Nazareth, 33 years - the term of the earthly life of Christ, also according to the New Testament, the Son of God was to be in the heart of the earth for three days and three nights (Matt. 12:40), that is, Jesus was in hell from the evening Friday to Sunday morning, in addition, the Apostle Peter denied Jesus Christ three times before the rooster crowed (by the way, this was also predicted at the Last Supper), there were three crosses on Golgotha, and Christ resurrected on the morning of the third day after the crucifixion.

PRACTICAL INFO:

Tickets for visiting the Last Supper must be ordered in advance, but rumors that they need to be booked six months in advance are greatly exaggerated. In fact, a month, or even three weeks before the intended visit, free tickets for the desired dates, as a rule, are available. You can order tickets on the website: the cost depends on the season, in winter visiting the Last Supper costs 8 euros, in summer - 12 euros (prices according to information for 2016). In addition, now at the church of Santa Maria delle Grazie you can often see resellers selling tickets with an extra charge of 2-3 euros, so if you are lucky, you can get there by accident. It is forbidden to take pictures of the fresco, the entrance is strictly at the time indicated on the ticket.

Did you like the material? Join us on facebook

Julia Malkova- Julia Malkova - founder of the website project. Former editor-in-chief of the elle.ru Internet project and editor-in-chief of the cosmo.ru website. I talk about traveling for my own pleasure and the pleasure of readers. If you are a representative of hotels, tourism office, but we are not familiar, you can contact me by email: [email protected]

Leonardo da Vinci- the most mysterious and unexplored personality of past years. Someone ascribes God's gift to him and classifies him as a saint, someone, on the contrary, considers him an atheist who sold his soul to the devil. But the genius of the great Italian is undeniable, since everything that the hand of the great painter and engineer has ever touched was instantly filled with hidden meaning. Today we will talk about the famous work "The Last Supper" and the many secrets it hides.

Location and history of creation:

The famous fresco is in the church Santa Maria delle Grazie located on the square of the same name in Milan. Or rather - on one of the walls of the refectory. According to historians, the artist specially depicted in the picture exactly the same table and dishes that were at that time in the church. By this he tried to show that Jesus and Judas (good and evil) are much closer to people than it seems.

The painter received an order to write a work from his patron, the Duke of Milan. Ludovico Sforza in 1495. The ruler was famous for his dissolute life and from a young age was surrounded by young Bacchantes. The situation was not changed at all by the fact that the duke had a beautiful and modest wife. Beatrice d'Este who sincerely loved her husband and, due to her meek disposition, could not argue with his way of life. It must be admitted that Ludovico Sforza sincerely revered his wife and was attached to her in his own way. But the dissolute duke felt the true power of love only at the moment of the sudden death of his wife. The grief of the man was so great that he did not leave his room for 15 days. And when it came out, the first thing I ordered Leonardo da Vinci fresco, which his late wife once asked for, and forever stopped all entertainment at court.

The work was completed in 1498. Its dimensions were 880 by 460 cm. Many connoisseurs of the artist's work agreed that the best "The Last Supper" can be seen if you move 9 meters to the side and rise 3.5 meters up. Moreover, there is something to see. Already during the life of the author, the fresco was considered his best work. Although, to call the picture a fresco would be wrong. The fact is that Leonardo da Vinci wrote the work not on wet plaster, but on dry plaster, in order to be able to edit it several times. To do this, the artist applied a thick layer of egg tempra to the wall, which subsequently did a disservice, starting to collapse just 20 years after the painting was painted. But more on that later.

Artwork idea:

"The Last Supper" depicts the last Easter supper of Jesus Christ with the apostle disciples, which took place in Jerusalem on the eve of his arrest by the Romans. According to the scripture, Jesus said during the meal that one of the apostles would betray him. Leonardo da Vinci I tried to depict the reaction of each of the students to the prophetic phrase of the Teacher. To do this, he walked around the city, spoke with ordinary people, made them laugh, upset, encouraged. And at the same time he watched the emotions on their faces. The author's goal was to display the famous dinner from a purely human point of view. That is why he depicted all those present in a row and did not add a halo over their heads to anyone (as other artists liked to do).

So we have reached the most interesting part of the article: the secrets and features hidden in the work of the great author.

1. According to historians, the most difficult Leonardo da Vinci the writing of two characters was given: Jesus and Judas. The artist tried to make them the embodiment of good and evil, so for a long time he could not find suitable models. Once an Italian saw a young singer in the church choir - so inspired and pure that there was no doubt: here he is - the prototype of Jesus for his "The Last Supper". But, despite the fact that the image of the Teacher was painted, Leonardo da Vinci corrected it for a long time, considering it insufficiently perfect.

The last unwritten character in the picture was Judas. The artist spent hours wandering through the most haunted places, looking for a model for writing among the downtrodden people. And now, almost 3 years later, he was lucky. In the ditch was lying absolutely fallen type in a state of extreme intoxication. The artist ordered to bring him to the workshop. The man almost did not stay on his feet and did not understand where he was. However, after the image of Judas was painted, the drunkard approached the picture and admitted that he had already seen it before. To the author's bewilderment, the man replied that three years ago he was completely different, led a correct lifestyle and sang in the church choir. It was then that an artist approached him with an offer to paint Christ from him. So, according to historians, Jesus and Judas were written off from the same person at different periods of his life. This once again emphasizes the fact that good and evil go so close that sometimes the line between them is imperceptible.

By the way, while working Leonardo da Vinci distracted by the abbot of the monastery, who constantly hurried the artist and argued that he should paint a picture for days, and not stand in front of her in thought. Once the painter could not stand it and promised the abbot to write off Judas from him if he did not stop interfering in the creative process.

2. The most discussed secret of the fresco is the figure of the disciple, located on the right hand of Christ. It is believed that this is none other than Mary Magdalene and her location indicates the fact that she was not Jesus' mistress, as is commonly believed, but his lawful wife. This fact is confirmed by the letter "M", which is formed by the contours of the bodies of the pair. Allegedly, it means the word "Matrimonio", which means "marriage" in translation. Some historians argue with this statement and insist that the signature is visible in the painting. Leonardo da Vinci- the letter "V". In favor of the first statement is the mention that Mary Magdalene washed the feet of Christ and wiped them with her hair. According to tradition, only a legal wife could do this. Moreover, it is believed that the woman was pregnant at the time of her husband's execution and subsequently gave birth to a daughter, Sarah, who laid the foundation for the Merovingian dynasty.

3. Some scientists argue that the unusual arrangement of students in the picture is not accidental. Say, Leonardo da Vinci placed people according to ... signs of the zodiac. According to this legend, Jesus was a Capricorn and his beloved Mary Magdalene was a virgin.

4. It is impossible not to mention the fact that during the bombing during World War II, a shell that hit the church building destroyed almost everything except the wall on which the fresco was depicted. Although, the people themselves not only did not take care of the work, but also acted with it truly barbarically. In 1500, a flood in the church caused irreparable damage to the painting. But instead of restoring the masterpiece, the monks in 1566 did in the wall with the image "The Last Supper" a door that "cut off" the legs of the characters. A little later, a Milan coat of arms was hung over the head of the Savior. And at the end of the 17th century, a stable was made from the refectory. The already dilapidated fresco was covered with manure, and the French competed with each other: who would hit the head of one of the apostles with a brick. However, they had "The Last Supper" and fans. The French king Francis I was so impressed with the work that he seriously thought about how to transport it to his home.

5. No less interesting are the reflections of historians about the food depicted on the table. For example, near Judas Leonardo da Vinci depicted an overturned salt shaker (which at all times was considered a bad omen), as well as an empty plate. But the biggest subject of controversy so far is the fish in the painting. Contemporaries still cannot agree on what is painted on the fresco - a herring or an eel. Scientists believe that this ambiguity is not accidental. The artist specially encrypted the hidden meaning in the picture. The fact is that in Italian "eel" is pronounced as "aringa". We add one more letter, we get a completely different word - “arringa” (instruction). At the same time, the word "herring" is pronounced in northern Italy as "renga", which means "one who denies religion" in translation. For an atheist artist, the second interpretation is closer.

As you can see, in a single picture, many secrets and understatements are hidden, over the disclosure of which more than one generation is struggling. Many of them will remain unsolved. And contemporaries will only have to guess and the great Italian in paints, marble, sand, trying to extend the life of the fresco.

On the fifth day after the solemn entry of the Lord into Jerusalem, on Thursday, the disciples asked Jesus Christ: “Where do you order us to prepare Easter for you?” (on Friday evening the Passover lamb was to be slaughtered).

Jesus Christ told them: “Go to Jerusalem; there you will meet a man carrying a pitcher of water; follow him into the house and tell the owner: The teacher says: where is the upper room (room) in which I would celebrate the Passover with my disciples? He will show you a large furnished room; prepare there." Having said this, the Savior sent two of His disciples: Peter and John. They went, and everything was fulfilled as the Savior had said, and they prepared the Passover.

In the evening of that day, Jesus Christ, knowing that He would be betrayed that night, came with His twelve apostles to the prepared upper room. When everyone sat down at the table, Jesus Christ said: “I very much desired to eat this Passover with you before My suffering, because, I tell you, I will no longer eat it until it is completed in the Kingdom of God.” Then he got up, took off his outer garment, girded himself with a towel, poured water into the washbasin and began to wash the disciples' feet and wipe them with the towel with which he was girded. After washing the feet of the disciples, Jesus Christ put on His clothes and, lying down again, said to them: “Do you know what I have done to you? Behold, you call Me Teacher and Lord, and you call Me correctly. So, if I, the Lord and your Teacher, have washed your feet, then you must do the same. I have given you an example, so that you also do what I have done for you.”

By this example, the Lord showed not only His love for His disciples, but also taught them humility, that is, not to consider it a humiliation for oneself to serve anyone, even a person who is inferior to himself.

After eating the Old Testament Jewish Passover, Jesus Christ established the Sacrament of Holy Communion at this supper.

And while they were eating, Jesus took bread and, having blessed it, broke it, and giving it to the disciples, said: “Take, eat; this is my body, which is broken for you for the remission of sins (that is, for you it is given over to suffering and death, for the forgiveness of sins). Then he took a cup of grape wine, blessed it, thanked God the Father for all His mercies to the human race, and, giving it to the disciples, said: “Drink everything from it, this is My Blood of the New Testament, shed for you for the remission of sins.”

These words mean that under the guise of bread and wine, the Savior gave His disciples the same Body and Blood, which the next day after that He gave up to suffering and death for our sins. How bread and wine become the Body and Blood of the Lord is a mystery, incomprehensible even to the Angels, which is why communion is called the Sacrament.

The Lord gave the commandment to always perform this Sacrament, saying: "Do this in remembrance of Me." This Sacrament is performed with us and now and will be performed until the end of the age at the divine service called the Liturgy or Mass.

During the Last Supper, the Savior announced to the apostles that one of them would betray Him. They were very saddened by this and in bewilderment, looking at each other, in fear began to ask one after another: “Am I not the Lord?” Judas also asked: “Is it not me, Rabbi?” Jesus tells him, "You said." John was reclining next to the Savior. Peter motioned to him to ask who the Lord was talking about. John, falling to the breast of the Savior, quietly said: “Lord! Who is this?" Jesus also quietly answered: “The one to whom I, having dipped a piece of bread, will give it.” And, having dipped a piece of bread, he gave it to Judas Iscariot, saying: “What you are doing, do it quickly.” But no one understood why the Savior told him this. And since Judas had a box of money, the disciples thought that Jesus Christ was sending him to buy something for the holiday or to give alms to the poor. Judas, having accepted the piece, immediately went out. It was night.

Jesus Christ, continuing to talk with His disciples, said: “Children! It won't be long for me to be with you. I give you a new commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you. By this all will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another. And there is no greater love than if someone lays down his life (gives his life) for his friends. You are My friends if you do what I command you."

During this conversation, Jesus Christ predicted to the disciples that they would all be tempted about Him that night, they would all scatter, leaving Him alone. The Holy Apostle Peter said: “If everyone is offended about You, I will never be offended.” Then the Savior said to him: “Truly, I say to you that this very night, before the cock crows, you will deny Me three times and say that you do not know Me.” But Peter became even more convinced, saying: "Even though it behooves me to die with You, I will not deny You." All the other apostles said the same. Yet the words of the Savior saddened them.

Comforting them, the Lord said: “Let not your heart be troubled (that is, do not grieve), believe in God (Father) and believe in Me (Son of God). The Savior promised His disciples to send from the Father another Comforter and Teacher, instead of Himself - the Holy Spirit: you know Him because He abides with you and will be in you (this means that the Holy Spirit will abide with all true believers in Jesus Christ - in the Church of Christ). A little more - and the world will no longer see Me; and you will see me; for I live (I am Life; and death cannot overcome Me), and you will live. But the Comforter, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you everything and remind you of everything that I have told you.” The Holy Spirit, the Spirit of truth, “Who proceeds from the Father, He will testify of Me; and also you will testify, because you are with me from the beginning” (John 15:26-27).

Jesus Christ also predicted to His disciples that they would have to endure much evil and misfortune from people because they believe in Him: “In the world you will have tribulation; but be of good cheer (be strong): I have conquered the world (that is, I have conquered the evil in the world)."

The Savior ended His conversation with a prayer for His disciples and for all who will believe in Him, so that the Heavenly Father would keep them all in firm faith, in love and in unanimity (in unity) among themselves.

Having finished the supper, they went beyond the Kidron stream, to the Mount of Olives, to the Garden of Gethsemane.

NOTE: See Matt. 26, 17-35; Mk. 14, 12-31; OK. 22:7-39; In. 13-17; 18, 1.

- Hello, this is Foma radio. Maundy Thursday is approaching - the day when the Last Supper took place. This is an event that turned the lives of all who were at the table with Christ and shared His last meal, and the lives of all other people who call themselves Christians.

Perhaps this explains the fact that various masters have addressed the theme of the Last Supper to this day. But the most famous example is, of course, Leonardo da Vinci's The Last Supper. Fresco that is in the refectory of the monastery of Santa Maria delle Grazie in Milan. How did she appear? And why is this work considered a milestone in the history of art? Let's try to talk about this. We are in touch via Skype with the historian, theologian Timothy Katnis. Hello!

- Hello.

- First, I would like to hear a few words about the author. Leonardo da Vinci himself - who was he? Genius? Crazy, as some contemporaries thought? After all, it is known that he did not complete a huge number of works that he began. What was this man?

Leonardo da Vinci was born in 1452. This personality in every sense falls outside the generally accepted framework. There are people who have been marked by the Lord since childhood. He was such a person. A child of the love of a lawyer and a peasant woman, brought up well and educated ...

“Even though he was an illegitimate son?”

- Yes Yes. In addition, he was left-handed, and sometimes wrote from right to left. Therefore, sometimes his notes can be read only if you turn the notebook to the mirror. From birth, he was an absolutely non-standard person. I think a lot of what his contemporaries considered insanity can be explained by one fact: Leonardo strove for perfection. He was very demanding. Even when we talk about the fresco "The Last Supper", although in the strict sense it is not really a fresco, a different technique was used there - even he painted it for a very long time. So long that it cost him trouble, complaints from the abbot of the monastery.

– You say that he was constantly striving for perfection. How many years did he work on the Last Supper fresco?

“Here you have to tell the backstory. He was invited by Duke Lodovico Sforza to Milan in 1482. He was already known then. Moreover, interestingly, he was invited not as a painter, but as an architect, hydraulic engineer, engineer ... And he was invited to the ducal engineering college.

Did he also have all these skills?

- Yes. I must say that Leonardo was far from limited to the scope of painting. To his future patron Sforza, he proposed designs for very light, strong bridges, cannons, weapons, and even projects that anticipated the invention of tanks. This is such a project of wagons, light, invulnerable and quickly disappearing. In Milan, Leonardo invented many things. For example, he is considered the inventor of the first cash register. In a sense, Leonardo da Vinci is the father of bookkeeping and accounting.

“It’s not for nothing that they call him the human universe. Michelangelo, da Vinci, our Lomonosov - all these are unique people who contained a huge number of various talents. But let's not digress. As for the customer of The Last Supper, was he the Duke of Sforza?

– No, the customer was the monastery of Santa Maria delle Grazie, who asked the maestro to paint the refectory. It was, in principle, a plot often found in the refectory of monasteries - the Last Supper. Therefore, there is nothing unusual in this. Something strange started later...

- Obviously, at the moment when Leonardo saw on which fragment of the wall he would have to place his fresco? There wasn't much room, as far as I can tell.

Yes, there really wasn't much space. And Leonardo first tried here and embodied the idea of ​​a complete, ideal deep perspective. Why this fresco will be called a milestone in the history of the Renaissance.

- What does it mean - a deep perspective?

- In order to increase the space, he drew the plot in such a way that a complete sense of depth is created. And not just depth, but such a depth that goes beyond the work. When you look at it, there is no feeling that there is not enough space. This is a revolutionary achievement.

– Have you seen this fresco with your own eyes? Is it true that any spectator there has a feeling of his presence at this very table?

- Yes it's true. There are two moments that create this feeling. The first thing that catches the eye, and this is done consciously, is the central figure of Christ. The moment from the Gospel is taken when the Lord says: “Truly, I say to you that one of you will betray Me.” Actually, these words are addressed to Judas. But at the same moment, the Lord points with his hand at the bread and wine. The space is distributed in such a way that there is a feeling of attraction between the viewer and the center of the picture.

Second: the table is designed in such a way as if it goes beyond the boundaries of its space. And it seems that that meal really continues to be carried out daily, and everyone is invited to this meal.

“But it’s very true theologically, isn’t it?”

– I think he wrote it for so long because Leonardo himself changed in the process of writing this fresco. This work has become for him something more than just an order. He treated every face, every moment, every fragment so demandingly that at some point the abbot of the monastery began to have the feeling that the maestro would not finish this work just like many others. And he went to complain about Leonardo to Duke Lodovico Sforza. And by this moment, in principle, most of the figures had already been painted, only Judas was missing. Leonardo really looked for his face for a very long time. He even walked through the very gloomy quarters of Milan to see the face of a criminal, some gloomy degenerate person. And when the abbot complained about him, the duke called him, scolded him, said: “Well, what is this! The money has already been paid to you, but you still can’t finish it. ” They say that in response, Leonardo flared up and said that if the abbot wanted to hurry, then he could write Judas from him.

Naturally, the abbot ceased to annoy him with such requests.

As a result, Leonardo solved this topic in a very interesting way. He abandoned the idea of ​​making Judas a vicious maniac. He wrote it by a man who is going through a very deep spiritual crisis. A person who even at that moment has the opportunity to change everything. When Christ says, “Truly, I say to you, one of you will betray me,” He does not at the same time name the traitor. This is the very moment when Judas has the opportunity to repent, to abandon his decision. Only after he takes the offered bread and remains silent, does not give up his intention, will Satan enter into him. But it was his conscious choice.

- In other words, Judas is not that he was a notorious villain or born with such a fatal predestination. This was a man who made his choice, and in fact, any of us could have been in his place, right?

– Of course, we must not forget that Judas was chosen by Christ. That Judas did the same miracles as the other apostles. He also preached, exorcised evil spirits... This should also be remembered. But it is another matter that free will remains in the hands of a person until the last day of life. We must remember that by choosing evil, we can reach a point where this evil can become irreversible. On the other hand, we can also remember the Apostle Peter, who was also present at the Last Supper and who denied Christ. But he found the strength to change himself. And he became the Chief Apostle.

- And tell us in a few words about the fate of the fresco. As far as I remember, it is tragic in the sense that Leonardo tried to experiment with materials, because of which the paint began to deteriorate rather quickly.

– The fact is that Leonardo wrote The Last Supper on a dry wall, and not on wet plaster, as is usually done. Usually, paint is applied to wet plaster, which dries quickly, and nothing can be changed. And Leonardo just wanted to change. Apparently, he felt that it would take a long time to write. Therefore, he wrote in tempera on a dry surface. The fact that this is not a fresco was realized quite late, after several attempts were made to restore it.

And the paint began to crumble even during the life of Leonardo. And it was a very big tragedy. Just before his departure for France, he visited the refectory of the monastery and saw that his brilliant completed work, obviously, would perish. What he experienced at that moment is hard to imagine. And the fact that something survived after it was restored and how many times it was attacked is really a miracle. Napoleon's soldiers set up a warehouse in this refectory, gouged out the eyes of the apostles, because they were atheists. Prior to this, in the 18th century, one restorer attempted to restore the fresco and rewrote all the faces. But he was forced to stop because the public began to resent. Then, after Napoleon, in 1821, another restorer took over, who specialized in the restoration of frescoes. He just realized that this is not a fresco. Then, during the war, a bomb hit the refectory. The wall was lined with sandbags, but the fresco still could not help but suffer from the impact.

The last and most successful restoration, using modern means, lasted 21 years. And on May 28, 1999, the painting was again open for viewing. So now visitors can see the version closest to the work of Leonardo da Vinci.