Barabbas

by Pär Lagerkvist, Alan Blair (Translator), André Gide (Contributor)

Barabbas is the acquitted; the man whose life was exchanged for that of Jesus of Nazareth, crucified upon the hill of Golgotha. Barabbas is a man condemned to have no god. "Christos Iesus" is carved on the disk suspended from his neck, but he cannot affirm his faith. He cannot pray. He can only say, "I want to believe."

Translated from the Swedish by Alan Blair

Genres: Fiction, Historical Fiction, Classics, Religion, Nobel Prize, Literature, Swedish Literature

144 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1946

About the author

Lagerkvist was born in 1891 in southern Sweden. In 1910 he went to Uppsala as a student and in 1913 he left for Paris, where he was exposed to the work of Pablo Picasso. He studied Middle Age Art, as well as Indian and Chinese literature, to prepare himself for becoming a poet. His first collection of poetry was published in 1916. In 1940 Lagerkvist was chosen as one of the "aderton" (the eighteen) of the Swedish Academy.

Lagerkvist wrote poetry, novels, plays, short stories and essays. He was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1951 "for the artistic vigour and true independence of mind with which he endeavours in his poetry to find answers to the eternal questions confronting mankind."

Reviews

[Valeriu Gherghel · Rating 4 out of 5]

Faptul că Evangheliile (și cele canonice, și cele apocrife) sînt laconice în multe privințe i-a îndemnat pe scriitori să-și imagineze „evanghelii alternative”, biografii posibile, să traseze „portrete” fără un temei scripturar ferm.

Un astfel de portret imaginar a construit Pär Fabian Lagerkvist (1891 - 1974) în cartea de față. La întrebarea lui Pilat din Pont, mulțimea a ales („La moarte cu omul acesta! Eliberează-l pe Baraba...”), și Baraba se trezește liber, nici el nu știe de ce. E nedumerit, confuz: l-a cunoscut în temniță pe Iisus, nu i s-a părut mai vinovat decît el, l-a privit chiar cu un strop de admirație. Cine a fost cu adevărat „rabinul acela searbăd”? Vrea să afle.

Romanul consemnează, așadar, ancheta lui Baraba. În Ierusalim, îi ascultă neîncrezător pe apostoli și este privit de ei cu aceeași mefiență. În definitiv, întrebarea pe care și-o pune Baraba (dar nu numai el) e redutabilă: „Un Mesia care să se lase răstignit... Cine a mai auzit una ca asta?”. De ce să accepte moartea, cui i-ar fi de folos această moarte? Răspunsul ucenicilor nu-l mulțumește. Și nici nu-l poate pricepe: Iisus a „suferit și a murit nevinovat în locul nostru... noi [oamenii] sîntem cei vinovaţi, şi nu el”.

Viața lui Baraba va fi încercarea de a obține o certitudine. Este un individ sceptic, structural sceptic, ar vrea să facă saltul în credință, dar nu poate. Mulți nu pot. Nu poți crede ceva pentru că așa vrei. Nu te poți obliga să crezi. Credința nu e o decizie. Crezi și gata. Baraba nu se lasă convins de nici o relatare, de nici o dovadă. Îl vizitează pe Lazăr, cel înviat după patru zile, și primește un răspuns stupefiant: „Ce, ai vrea să-ţi povestesc ceva despre împărăţia morţii? Aşa ceva nu pot. Împărăţia morţii nu e nimic. Există – dar nu e nimic”. Întîlnirea nu i-a fost de folos.

Ajunge rob într-o mină de cupru. Își face un prieten, Sahak, învață să se roage, renunță după o vreme, nu pricepe rostul rugăciunii. Sahak e scos din mină și cere să fie eliberat și Baraba. Astfel, ajunge sclavul de casă al procuratorului roman, îl însoțește la Roma. Obsesia de a găsi un răspuns nu-l părăsește. Cînd izbucnește incendiul, sub Nero, în 19 iulie 64, își pierde mințile.

Pentru Baraba căutarea a fost un eșec: „Avusese vreun rost viaţa pe care o trăise? Nici măcar atît nu credea. Dar despre asta nu ştia de fapt nimic. Nu îi era lui dat să judece”. În fiecare dintre noi se află, probabil, un Baraba...

[s.penkevich [hiatus-will return-miss you all] · Rating 4 out of 5]

‘Was there any meaning in the life he lived? Not even that did he believe in. But this was something he knew nothing about. It was not for him to judge.’

Despite the small size of this novel, it is a deep chasm of heavy thoughts and difficult questions. Barabbas, widely considered the masterpiece of the Swedish author and 1951 Nobel laureate Par Lagerkvist, is a parable of the dilemma of faith. Barabbas, acquitted for murder, goes on living while Jesus is crucified in his stead, and spends his life haunted by this single event. While he is ‘damned lucky’, emphasis on damned, to be alive, he cannot help but feel life is meaningless anyways and struggles to accept faith in this strange crucified man whom he hears so much about. Powerful and deeply moving, this novel offers a unique, detached perspective on religion and faith, as a parable that is as poignant today as it was back in the religious persecution days of ancient Rome while being able to reach a reader despite any personal religious beliefs.

Lagerkvist built a fruitful career around challenging morality and faith within his readers. His prose is simple and direct, wasting no time with verbose passages, and cuts right to the heart making every word count. This novel, weighing in at a mere 144 pages, is bursting beyond capacity with moral musings and feels more like a novel of epic proportions that a slim novella. He also manages to take a topic that is known for inducing strong, passionate opinions from both sides of the spectrum and writing about it in an objective, removed manner. For example, the opening chapter is the most chilling depiction of the crucifixion on Mouth Golgotha I have ever encountered. Barabbas stands and witnesses the scene with a cold indifference, not knowing anything about the man being crucified. Jesus is never named in the novel, being only referred to as the ‘dead man’ or ‘crucified man’, and it is strange to see him regarded in such an impersonal way, especially in a scene illustrating his violent death. In a way, this objective approach is necessary to fit the lead character, but also makes the ideas easier to swallow as they aren’t tainted by emotion or seeming too slanted either way. There are times when both Christians and atheists will feel he is on their side and other passages where they will find him seemingly aligned against them. I feel this novel can work regardless of a religious opinion, yet as always, one must keep an open mind and allow the novel to unfold. It goes some very dark and disturbing places, and readers should be cautioned that the ironic, enigmatic conclusion is not a light at the end of a tunnel. This novel will challenge all beliefs and portray the world as a cruel, indifferent place as we follow Barabbas on his journey.

The idea of faith is the pulse of this novel. While Barabbas wants so badly to believe, he cannot. He cannot grasp the meaning behind the doctrine to ‘love one another’, simple as it may be, for he has no notion of love. He witnesses many potent events, yet tries to find logical explanations for them. He also cannot grasp how if a man was God, why he would allow himself a slaves death, and furthermore, why he would allow his followers to suffer and be put to death as well. Lagerkvist lays out the foundation to the disbelief of a God found in many people, yet offers slight glimpses of counter arguments: ‘He had used his power in the most extraordinary way. Used it by not using it, as it were; allowed others to decide exactly as they liked; refrained from interfering and yet had got his own way all the same…’ (remind LOST fans of Jacob there?). This crisis of faith causes the world to seem an even more indifferent place than he originally thought, ‘He was not bound together with anyone. Not with anyone at all in the whole world,’ and Lagerkvist pours an ocean of lonesome imagery into later portions of the novel.

Seemingly every word and event is a metaphor of religion, allowing the novel to work on several levels. Barabbas was ‘born hated’ by parents who cared nothing for him, such as the mother who died in childbirth cursing the world and all in it. He is damned from the start, much like the idea of original sin. The accusers of those who are preaching the crucified mans doctrine are often blind or near blind. Pay attention to every detail, as there are many layers to this novel. The book also works as a critique of modern times. The Christians in the book are persecuted for their faith, but it is primarily because it preaches that the lowest of citizens will be set free and equals with all those above them. Without understanding what this means, the Romans want to squash this belief as they want to keep the lepers and beggars and other lower class folk oppressed. Lagerkvist is often critical of those with power, yet shows many of the leaders as decent people and that it is the system and standards that create the cruelty those beneath them suffer. It is interesting how religion and Roman government are juxtaposed in many scenes, often more so to highlight their similarities instead of their differences. Lagerkvist is quite critical of Christians at time, showing many of the staunch followers to be rather hypocritical. They preach love and acceptance, yet seem very exclusive and unwelcoming to people who don’t fit their mold, such as Barabbas and the girl with the hare-lip.

I had read this intending it to be a quick escape after finishing Joyce’s epic novel, yet found myself caught up in the burdenous queries posed by this novel. Lagerkvist has a gift of stirring such strong feelings with so few words. If you enjoy examining faith, this is the book for you. It is a trip through suffering, offering both hope, and crushing visions of the world and death as a meaningless void. I will certainly be returning to the novels of Lagerkvist soon, his simple prose styling and layered meanings are too marvelous to only read one of his books.
4/5

I hope I didn't raise anyones blood pressure with this review. Please know that I had no intentions of conveying any opinions regarding religion, either for or against, and was simply trying to review a book with a difficult message. Anything said in this review was with no desire to dispute, argue, or impose any beliefs, just to detail the literary merits of this wonderful novel by an author surely deserving of the Nobel recognition. I would be more than happy to dicuss such topics with any willing person, as I find the various forms of religion fascinating, but this review was intended to be written purely objectively. Sorry for the disclaimer, but this is a touchy subject with many.

[Warwick · Rating 4 out of 5]

My kids love churches, but not having been brought up religiously, they don't understand any of the iconography. Trying to explain to a six-year-old why they all have statues of this beardy guy slowly dying on a stick has really brought home to me what a hideous and morbid idea Christianity is built on. I understand that some people find it very touching and beautiful, but I find it difficult to see it that way. Telling people that this man went through agony, and then died, on your behalf, whether you like it or not, is a heavy load to lay on someone and entails a serious amount of what I suppose psychologists would call guilt.

What's very clever about this book is that Pär Lagerkvist has found a way to examine this idea which works whether or not you believe in the metaphysics: Barabbas, the man acquitted in Jesus's place, is someone in whom the central myth of Christianity is literally true.

They spoke of his having died for them. That might be. But he really had died for Barabbas, no one could deny it!

So the reactions of Barabbas – relief, disbelief, morbid curiosity, survivor's guilt – become a kind of study in what Christian dogma might imply for the human mind. Barabbas can never quite bring himself to believe in Jesus as a divine figure, but, as he says in the novel's most famous passage: ‘I want to believe.’ That conflict is the essence of the book.

Barabbas is a great figure to expand upon, since in the source material he is both crucial and barely mentioned. The Bible gives very few details about him, though there's some suggestion in Luke that he took part in riots in Jerusalem. John, usually the most poetic of the gospels, is disappointingly brief: it simply says, ‘Barabbas was a bandit [λῃστής].’ This gives Lagerkvist great freedom to construct a suitably rough past for him, and the scope to imagine how this one act of being freed might have affected the rest of his life.

In some versions of the Biblical text, Barabbas's full name is ‘Jesus Barabbas’ (which would make sense of Pilate's question to the crowd in Luke – ‘Who would you have me free, [Jesus] Barabbas or the Jesus that is called Christ?’). This may reflect a later mythological tradition, but even so, it points to a deep sense in which the two are equated – indeed, there are serious Biblical scholars who believe that they are one and the same person. This duality is fully explored in Lagerkvist's story, which sees Barabbas go through similar ordeals and, for that matter, end up nailed in the same place.

His state of mind and his state of belief at that point are open to interpretation. It's a very incisive way of looking at the challenges and mysteries of such big topics as atonement, the crucifixtion, and faith – and one which goes to the heart of them in a way that theological texts generally do not.

[Luke · Rating 4 out of 5]

4.5/5

It amuses me, sometimes, the way people judge books. They'll ban them for epithets, they'll ban them for sex, they'll ban them for witchcraft. More often than not, they'll ban them for raising uncomfortable questions in the minds of children who have not yet been conditioned to follow the proper path. Ignore, and if you cannot ignore, condemn until you can, and if you cannot condemn until you can. Eradicate.

You could ban this book for any of those reasons, much as you could ban the Bible. Either one poses much more danger than most literature deemed unsafe. For one has resulted in millenia of misguided atrocities and the other is, well. A glimpse of the New Testament's birth, before all the context, before all the history, before all the rules. Of what could have resulted without it.

The New York Times and Time Magazine both referred to it as a parable. I really have to wonder how seriously they took it. It's true that it's not that long, and has religious underpinnings. The 'conveying a truth, religious principle, moral lesson, or meaning' part, though. To put it succinctly, in comparison to this 'parable', nihilism seems vastly more definitive, even encouraging. At least the latter has an end goal.

I will admit to bias, seeing how I was raised Catholic without once grasping the concept behind it all. The question has always fascinated me, though. The meaning of existence. And what a broad field it is! Sophisticated existentialism, misinformed agnosticism, misinterpreted atheism. The hydra of faith. It's all very fascinating, really. To see what extensive lengths humanity has gone to in its attempt to reconcile the matter of its wandering in the world. All the shields it has built up between it and the dark.

If this book doesn't make you question whatever shield you have chosen, I would be worried. It doesn't matter that this is framed within the context of one of many religions. It is a human story, subject to the facts of life, the whims of fate, and the maelstrom of the mind. Ultimately, it is cruel, and strange, and will not divulge its secrets, for the truth is that it has no secrets to divulge. What it has is a chain of events that could mean one thing, or another, unless perhaps you missed a lesson here, or heard something incorrectly there, and maybe that person really wasn't the right one you should have listened to, or it was that one happenstance that really messed things up, and if it wasn't for that one specific moment in time you'd know exactly what you were supposed to do, and how things were going to happen, and what it all meant.

Chitterings in the void.

You know what, go ahead and think that this is a parable. Settle on some kind of conclusion, at least, and get it out of your head. It's not conducive to living, this kind of talk. Banning is a bit much, but temperance. Yes. Temperance is a must.

[KamRun · Rating 3 out of 5]

دختر به آن مرد که پسر خدا می‌خواندَش و باراباس او را مرده می‌نامید ایمان آورده بود. باراباس از دختر پرسید آن مرد براستی چه چیزی تعلیم می‌داد. دختر مدتی ساکت ماند و بعد با زمزمه‌ای نامفهوم گفت: "یکدیگر را دوست بدارید آنگونه که من شما را دوست می‌دارم". - از متن

کتاب شرح حال باراباس از بدو آزادی تا لحظه مرگ را روایت می‌کند و در این اثنا دو نقطه اتکای تاریخی دارد، یکی آزادی باراباس به‌جای مسیح در دادگاه والی رومی و دیگری توطئه‌پردازی برعلیه مسیحیان در امپراطوری روم. باقی مطالب داستان‌پردازی نویسنده محسوب می‌شود. باراباس، ضدقهرمان یکی از واقعه‌های پایانی و مهم اناجیل است: دادگاه رومی و صدور حکم تصلیب عیسی. این واقعه در بخش پایانی اناجیل و در قسمت بدین صورت آمده است

رسم والی بر اين بود که هنگام عيد يک زندانی را به انتخاب مردم آزاد سازد. در آن زمان زندانی معروفی به نام باراباس در حبس بود. پس هنگامی که مردم گرد آمدند، پيلاتس از آنها پرسيد: چه کسی را می‌خواهيد برايتان آزاد کنم، باراباس را يا عيسای معروف به مسيح را؟ اين را از آن‌‌رو گفت که می‌دانست عيسی را از سرِ رشک به او تسليم کرده‌اند. هنگامی که پيلاتس بر مسند داوری نشسته بود، همسرش پيغامی بدين مضمون برای او فرستاد که تو را با اين مرد بی‌گناه کاری نباشد، زيرا امروز خوابی درباره او ديدم که مرا بسيار رنج داد. اما سران کاهنان و مشايخ، قوم را ترغيب کردند تا آزادی باراباس و مرگ عيسی را بخواهند. پس چون والي پرسيد: کدام‌‌يک از اين دو را برايتان آزاد کنم؟ پاسخ دادند: باراباس را. پيلاتس پرسيد: پس با عيسای معروف به مسيح چه کنم؟ همگی گفتند: بر صليبش کن! پيلاتس پرسيد: چرا؟ چه بدی‌ای کرده است؟ اما آنها بلندتر فرياد برآوردند: بر صليبش کن! چون پيلاتس ديد که کوشش بيهوده است و حتي بيم شورش می‌رود، آب خواست و دستهای خود را در برابر مردم شست و گفت: من از خون اين مرد بری هستم، خود دانيد! مردم همه در پاسخ گفتند: خون او بر گردن ما و فرزندان ما باد! آنگاه پيلاتس، باراباس را برايشان آزاد کرد و عيسی را تازيانه زده، سپرد تا بر صليبش کشند
متی 27: 15 تا 26

بعد از این واقعه باراباس آزاد می شود و دیگر اثری از او در تاریخ نیست. از این پس نام باراباس در کنار یهودا اسخریوطی به یکی از بدنام‌ترین و بدشگون‌ترین نام‌ها تبدیل می‌شود. اما من تصور دیگری درباره باراباس دارم، باراباس تمثیلی بسیار اساسی و حتی ضروری در اناجیل است. انتخاب شخصیتی مانند باراباس و ارجح دانستن او بر مسیح، زیباترین تمثیل از کل پیام مسیح و عهد جدید محسوب می‌شود. اگر سال‌ها بعد شاگردان مسیح به این باور یقین پیدا کردند که مسیح بهر گناه آنان فدیه شد - چنان‌که پطرسِ حواری می گوید: او گناهان ما را در بدن خويش بر صلیب متحمل شد - باراباس همان روز به این حقیقت باور داشت که عیسی به جای او به صلیب کشیده شده است:

او قدرت و نفوذ خود را به غیرعادی‌ترین وجه ممکن به کار برده بود، چنان بود که گویی آن را با به کار نبردن پیش برده بود. گذاشته بود دیگران هرگونه بخواهند تصمیم بگیرند و عمل کنند، از مداخله در کار ایشان روی گردانده بود و موفق شده بود به جای باراباس مصلوب شود. شاگردانش از مردن او به خاطر خویش سخن می‌گفتند اما آن مرد درواقع امر بخاطر باراباس جان داده بود و کسی نمی‌توانست این حقیقت را انکار کند. در نفس امر باراباس از جمیع ایشان به وی نزدیک‌تر بود و با رشته‌ای خاص به وی پیوسته بود. عیسی او را برگزیده بود تا از عذاب برهد و آزاد شود. عیسی به طور ضمنی به ایشان گفته بود باراباس را آزاد کنید و مرا به صلیب بیاویزید -از متن کتاب

مگر مفهوم مسیحی فیض آن بخششی نیست که به شخصی اعطا می‌شود که به هیچ‌عنوان لیاقت آن را ندارد و رایگان است برای دریافت کننده ولی پربها برای اهدا کننده؟ اگر چنین است پس نجات باراباس از مرگ، عیان‌ترین و دم‌دستی ترین مثال بارز مفهوم فیض مسیحی‌ست: باراباس راهزن و قاتلی شناخته‌شده بود و در او اثری از ندامت دیده نمی‌شد. اگر کسی با قضاوت ما از اعمالش لیاقت بخشش را داشت، باراباس در آخرین اولویت‌ها قرار می‌گرفت، با این وجود باراباس بخشیده شد و عیسی به جایش مصلوب گشت. مشخص نیست که بعد از این واقعه چه بر سر باراباس آمد و چگونه زیست و مرد. اما قلبا آرزو می کنم این آیه عهد جدید در مورد او صدق کند که: او به‌‌خاطر همه مرد تا زندگان ديگر نه برای خود، بلکه برای آن‌‌کس زيست کنند که به‌‌خاطرشان مرد و برخاست. دوم قرنتیان 5: 15


درباره کتاب

شیوه‌ی روایت بسیار ساده است و بنظرم داستان پردازی خیلی خوبی ندارد. شخصیت پردازی هم بجز در مورد باراباس، آنچنان که باید قوی نیست و شخصیت‌های مکمل یکی پس از دیگری به صحنه وارد و از آن خارج می‌شوند. اشکال دیگر داستان این است که موقعیت‌ها به اندازه کافی موشکافی و توصیف نمی‌شود و خواننده در خماری می‌ماند. با این وجود کتاب را دوست داشتم از این‌رو که تا امروز از روی نام باراباس به‌عنوان شخصیتی بی‌اهمیت و منفی عبور کرده بودم و بدین حد در حقیقیتِ آنچه بر باراباس گذشته دقیق نشده بودم، اما کتاب مرا در این امر یاری کرد. کتاب را فقط به آنان‌که عهد جدید یا حداقل اناجیل را خوانده اند توصیه می‌کنم
فیلمی اقتباسی از این داستان به کارگردانی ریچارد فلیشر (محصول سال 1961) و درخشش آنتونی کوئین ساخته شده که هنوز بعد گذشت سال‌ها زیبایی‌ها و عظمت خاص خود را دارد

[Sidharth Vardhan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Barabbas is the guy who was acquitted in Christ's place - and, so, the only person Christ literally died for. And so, perhaps he might invite a parable for the whole Christian world? Personally, I can't see this book as a parable though. Personally, I think the story is called Barabbas because author talking about humanity in general needs a person around whom story could pivot (the word always reminds me of Ross) around and Barabbas happened to be a good choice. Since he is living because Jesus died for him, he has a very direct connection with him, he is closer to Christ than anybody else and can't get him out of his mind.

But this connection exists only in blind side. He hasn't talked with same - and has seen him only in the last moments when he was being humiliated and suffering miserably for having spread the message of love. Plus, Barabbas himself has a past filled with hatred - his father was a bandit, his mother gave him birth cursing the world Jesus was to bless, his own brother tried to kill him, and he is himself a bandit. Naturally, he finds the idea of 'loving one another' lunatic. And thus, even miracles he comes across aren't enough for him to believe in a messiah he doesn't understand.

As I said Barabbas is only a pivot thoigh, the story is just as much about characters around him. Despite being the Son of God, Jesus doesn't seem to have bother considering much as to who shall have the luck of being in his divine presence during his tour de Earth; asking total strangers to his scriptures to follow him and so on - there is hardly anything to suggest they deserve it. Just think some Roman soldier must have got the chance to nail Christ divine hand to cross and we don't know the name of notorious fellow! This seems a common problem with other Abrahamic messiahs too - God decided to put Mohammad in a desert too. Mosses was an exception, being born in a royal family of one of best civilizations of his time - but he quickly corrected it by taking his folks to deserts.

Anyways, the point being that like Barabbas, the early Christian folks seem to be mere everymen lacking any charisma whatsoever. So, what chance than did the followers had of understanding the divine message? Christ's 'love each other' is a riddle to people living in times when physical violence is common, slavery is exercised, people enjoying torturing victims - whether it be crucifixion or stoning. It is so far beyond everybody's head that understanding is not the way to it. All that is left, despite miracles and all is faith.

Such are troubles for Barabbas in his path to believe - for he wants to believe.Before he was acquitted he had to live for days in dark prison with nothing but the idea of a painful and humiliating death to look forward. Now that he is free - he has that awareness of inadequacy, of powerlessness of a human and his short life. Like Lazarus, whom too Jeses saved, the 'saving' hasn't restored him to what he was before. There is this craving in him - to believe in something. And unlike, many of us modern folks, he doesn't have any alternatives in forms of the philosophical system, nor is he gifted in any art forms or has a family to support. And so, like a star-crossed lover, he keeps in turns refusing and returning to Christ.

While there are miracles in the book, they only serve to raise questions. Christians are constantly persecuted but that doesn't The book has one foot each both in boats of belief and lack of same and it manages to balance brilliantly.

[Megha · Rating 4 out of 5]

"I have no god", Barabbas answered at last...
"Why then do you bear this "Christos Iesus" carved on your disk?"
"Because I want to believe", Barabbas said..."

He wanted to believe. But he did not understand.

"Love one another" - that's what they said the message of the crucified man was. Love one another - now what could that mean to Barabbas's simple mind? What could love mean to Barabbas who had been hated even by his mother from the moment he drew his first breath? Who had never felt any emotional connection with another human being? No it was too much for Barabbas to understand.
He was unwittingly caught up in happenings well beyond his comprehension. He could not believe in the messiah that many others had faith in. At the same time, he never was able to shirk off his sense of guilt and spiritual torment. His inner struggle reminds me a lot of the whiskey priest. Both struggle with questions of faith, albeit of very different nature.

It was Barrabas's poor luck that his life be entwined so closely with that of the crucified man - perhaps even closer than the strongest of the believers. When Barabbas was allowed to live, the other had to die. One died among his friends and followers. Barabbas lived and died alone - utterly alone. One was said to have risen from the dead. Barabbas -while still breathing - found himself trapped in the realm of the dead. Barabbas carried a disk with the name "Christos Iesus" crossed out. And that was his cross to bear.

On one hand, Barabbas, having witnessed these events of possibly huge import, was unable to put the pieces together and make any sense out of it. On the other, there were followers who knew of the messiah only from hearsay, yet believed in him strongly enough to part with their lives in his name. From firm believers, to staunch dissenters, to skeptics, Lagerkvist has created the entire spectrum. Through this ensemble, Lagrekvist also explores the nature of faith. Some believe too readily, some others are too cautious. He also brings to fore how questions of faith and superstition could have political ramifications. There are multiple mentions of lepers and slaves eagerly awaiting the appearance of the messiah and giving them a better life. These people of the lower classes who have no other way of belying a life of drudgery, are willing to grab on to anything that gives them hope. The possibility of the lower classes gaining strength makes the government stir to curb people's beliefs. And amidst all this turbulence, stands Barabbas, dazed like a deer, attempting in vain to fight off the storm within himself.

Of course, this doesn't need to be read as a religious novel. I read this as a story about a man's inner struggle. Lagrekvist achieves an impressive feat by telling the story from the naive and uncomprehending point of view of Barabbas. Even with such a narrow field of vision, he presents a story with multiple layers and a lot of depth. Barabbas's view will provide the readers with a lot to chew upon. It was only Barabbas who did not understand....


PS: The book also comes with a seal of approval from André Gide, if the name means anything to you.

[Peiman E iran · Rating 1 out of 5]

‎دوستانِ گرانقدر، این رمان در موردِ داستانِ موهومِ <باراباس> و البته عیسی مسیح میباشد ... به گفتهٔ داستان پردازانِ مسیحی، این آقایِ باراباس، تبهکاری از شهرِ جلیلهٔ اسرائیل میباشد که یهودیان با پافشاری، کاری میکنند تا او به جایِ عیسی مسیح که یک یهودیِ شورشی بوده است، از بند آزاد شده و عیسی مصلوب گردد!!! که البته عزیزانم، این داستانها که تعدادشان زیاد است و هرکدام هم یک چیزی در موردِ این داستانِ موهومِ مصلوب شدنِ مسیح و مردن یا نمردنِ مسیح بر رویِ صلیب و تاوانِ خونِ مسیح و قربانی شدنِ مسیح و این مسائل گفته اند، هیچگونه سندیتِ تاریخی نداشته و همچون دیگر مواردِ مربوط به عیسی، همچون داستانِ زاده شدنش از مریم و محلِ زاده شدنِ وی، همگی ساختهٔ ذهنِ مسیحیان در آن نبردِ همیشگیِ خویش با یهودیان میباشند و بس.. یکی از دلایلِ ساختِ اینگونه شخصیتها همچون باراباس، از سویِ کشیشیانِ دروغگو و تحریفگرِ مسیحی، به وجود آوردنِ کینه و دشمنی در دلِ مسیحیانِ بیچاره از همان دورانِ کودکی میباشد.. کینه از فلان موجودی که نه دیده اند و نه او را میشناسند، سبب میشود تا عشقِ به مسیح و مظلومیتِ او در دلِ مسیحیانِ زودباور بیشتر شود.. اینکار در مذاهبِ دیگر هم انجام میشود.. همانطور که شیعیان را از کودکی عادت داده اند تا از عُمرِ خطاب و یا شِمر کینه و دشمنی به دل داشته باشند و این کینه به قولِ خودشان مهر و مظلومیتِ حسین و یا فاطمه را در دلشان افزایش میدهد... عزیزانم، هیچگاه بخاطرِ این دینفروشانِ دروغپرداز، وجودتان را از کودکی با کینه و دشمنیِ ابلهانه لبریز نکنید... اگر هدفتان خواندنِ این کتاب بود، آن را فقط به عنوانِ یک داستانِ معمولی بخوانید.. که البته بازهم ارزشِ وقت هدر کردن را ندارد
----------------------------------------------
‎باراباس، مسیح را از نزدیک دیده است، ولی او را به عنوانِ یک پیامبر یا موجودی برتر از انسانهایِ دیگر نمیداند.. با این حال، مردم دست از سرِ او بر نمیدارند و حال که فهمیده اند او عیسی را دیده است، از وِی مُدام درخواست میکنند تا در موردِ عیسی برایشان سخن بگوید... ولی باراباسِ بیچاره، دیگر از این مسائل خسته شده است و حاضر نیست سخن بگوید و اگر چیزی هم میگوید، همچون همان داستانهایِ مصلوب شدنِ مسیح، مهملاتی نامفهوم به زبان می آورد... البته باراباس خیلی چیزها را نمیتواند فراموش کند و نوعی اندوه و دلتنگی، شبیه به عذابِ وجدان، در وجودش ریشه دوانده است
‎باراباس سعی میکند تا با کار کردن، خویش را سرگرم کرده تا یادِ مسیح و مردم، او را رها کند.. بنابراین مدتی در معدنِ مس، مشغول به کار میشود و در معدن با برده ای شورشی به نامِ <ساهاک> آشنا میشود ... ساهاک بدونِ آنکه به درستی بداند عیسی که بوده و چه بوده است!! همانندِ دیگر ایمان آورندگانِ مذهبی در طولِ تاریخ که نمیدانند به چه چیزی ایمان آورده اند! به مسیح ایمان آورده و صلیبی به گردن آویخته است... در هرحال، ساهاکِ بدبخت را با آن صلیبِ در گردنش، دستگیر کرده و نزدِ دادستانِ روم میبرند و ساهاک اعتراف میکند که یک مسیحی میباشد و به حکمِ دادگاه، ساهاک را در مقابلِ دیدگانِ باراباس به صلیب میکشند .. گویا در این داستان، این باراباسِ بیچاره، باید هر دفعه شاهدِ مصلوب شدنِ شورشی هایی همچون عیسی مسیح و ساهاک و دیگر پیروانِ مسیحی باشد.. که البته از دیدگاهِ مسیحیان، این یعنی عذاب کشیدنِ باراباس!!! درکل دوستانِ گرامی، تنها چیزی که میتواند داستان را جالب کند، همین بی تفاوتی و بی ثباتیِ ذهنیِ باراباس میباشد که البته این بی ثباتی در نوعِ نگارشِ نویسنده نیز نمایان است... اتفاقاً اینکه داستان را <پارلا گرکویست> نوشته است نیز نوعی بی ثباتی به شمار می آید و جالب است.. چراکه این نویسنده، تا جایی که من میدانم، به هیچ عنوان به مسیح و دیگر موهوماتِ دینی و مذهبی، باور نداشته است
---------------------------------------------
‎امیدوارم این ریویو، در جهتِ آشنایی با این داستان، مفید بوده باشه
‎<پیروز باشید و ایرانی>

[Marc Lamot · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting novel. Lagerkvist has creatively handled the known story of the Christian Passion and focussed on the perspective of Barabbas, the criminal that in the biblical story was released in exchange for Christ. He is presented as as troubled and a seeking man, that really wanted but could not believe in Jesus. Fortunately, the traditional Scandinavian moralising tone is absent here. Nicely written, with sometimes beautiful passages and even in many ways an evocation of life in the margin and the centre of the Roman Empire. In my view, Lagerkvist could have gone a bit further in his psychological portrait, and made the novel longer; there's a bit too little flesh on the bone, here.
(rating 2.5 stars)

[mai ahmd · Rating 4 out of 5]

افضل رواية يمكن أن تقرأها تجسد الصراع الداخلي ما بين الكفر والإيمان
حالة الشك وما بين الإيمان ونقيضه قصة باراباس الرجل الذي أطلق سراحه فيم أعدم المسيح.. رائعة

[هيفاء · Rating 4 out of 5]

*هذه المُراجعة تحتوي على تفاصيل قد لا يفهمها سوى الإخوة المسيحيين.

المسيح عيسى ابن مريم نبي الله، المخلوق بكلمة "كن فيكون" رسولًا لبني إسرائيل، تكلم في المهد ليشهد على براءة أمه "مريم العذراء" وبأنه كلمة الله، قال تعالى في سورة مريم: قَالَ إِنِّي عَبْدُ اللَّهِ آتَانِيَ الْكِتَابَ وَجَعَلَنِي نَبِيّاً (30) وَجَعَلَنِي مُبَارَكاً أَيْنَ مَا كُنتُ وَأَوْصَانِي بِالصَّلَاةِ وَالزَّكَاةِ مَا دُمْتُ حَيّاً (31) وَبَرّاً بِوَالِدَتِي وَلَمْ يَجْعَلْنِي جَبَّاراً شَقِيّاً (32) وَالسَّلَامُ عَلَيَّ يَوْمَ وُلِدتُّ وَيَوْمَ أَمُوتُ وَيَوْمَ أُبْعَثُ حَيّاً (33) ذَلِكَ عِيسَى ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ قَوْلَ الْحَقِّ الَّذِي فِيهِ يَمْتَرُونَ (34) مَا كَانَ لِلَّهِ أَن يَتَّخِذَ مِن وَلَدٍ سُبْحَانَهُ إِذَا قَضَى أَمْراً فَإِنَّمَا يَقُولُ لَهُ كُن فَيَكُونُ (35)

وجعل له من المعجزات ما يلي، قال تعالى في سورة آل عمران: وَرَسُولاً إِلَى بَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ أَنِّي قَدْ جِئْتُكُم بِآيَةٍ مِّن رَّبِّكُمْ أَنِّي أَخْلُقُ لَكُم مِّنَ الطِّينِ كَهَيْئَةِ الطَّيْرِ فَأَنفُخُ فِيهِ فَيَكُونُ طَيْراً بِإِذْنِ اللّهِ وَأُبْرِئُ الأكْمَهَ والأَبْرَصَ وَأُحْيِـي الْمَوْتَى بِإِذْنِ اللّهِ وَأُنَبِّئُكُم بِمَا تَأْكُلُونَ وَمَا تَدَّخِرُونَ فِي بُيُوتِكُمْ إِنَّ فِي ذَلِكَ لآيَةً لَّكُمْ إِن كُنتُم مُّؤْمِنِينَ (49)

في ذلك الزمن كان الرومان هم أصحاب المركز السياسي في القدس واليهود هم رجال الدين، ومع انتشار الظلم والفساد كان النبي عيسى هو المنقذ والهادي إلى طريق الحق، نصير الفقراء والضعفاء وشافي المرضى ومُحيي الموتى بإذن الله، ومع تزايد أتباعه وإيمانهم به أثار ذلك الأمر حفيظة الكهنة ورجال الدين لتبدأ الحرب من المضايقة والسخرية والاستهزاء به ومحاولة تشويه سمعته أمام أتباعه إلى أن تطورت بالفتنة عند الحاكم الروماني "بيلاطس البنطي" بقولهم أن عيسى سوف يقود مظاهرة لإسقاط الحكم الروماني وأنه يقوم بتحريض العامة ومنعهم من دفع الضرائب للدولة، فأمر بسجن المسيح تحت ضغط من قساوسة اليهود، إلا أنه بعد التحقيق معه لم يرى في عيسى أطماعًا سياسية أو تهديدًا للعرش، ومع هذا رضخ لقوة اليهود ولم يأمر بقتله بل جعل القرار لهم في يوم الفصح حيث يختار الناس واحد من اثنين، يتم العفو عن أحدهم وإعدام الآخر صلبًا. باراباس هو السجين الآخر الذي تم القبض عليه بتهمة السرقة، القتل، الفساد والفتنة، وكان من إنحطاط الجمهور الذي حضر في ساحة القضاء من رجال الدين وأتباعهم أن يطلبون من الحاكم الروماني إطلاق سراح باراباس الفاسد وإعدام الصادق المسيح عليه السلام صلبًا، حيث اُقتيد بمشهد يُدمي القلب إلى "الجلجلة" وهي الصخرة التي يُعتقد أن المسيح صُلب عليها، ويحل مكانها اليوم كنيسة القيامة في القدس المحتلة. بهذا المشهد الذي صُلب فيه المسيح وسط اثنين من المحكوم عليهم بالإعدام لفسادهم يتجلى الظلم في أبشع صورة. هُنا في هذه الرواية للكاتب السويدي بار لاغركفيست الحائز على جائزة نوبل للأدب عام 1951 والذي جعل من هذا المجرم باراباس عنوان الرواية في تصوير الحالة التي أصابته بعد أن تم إطلاق سراحه وهو المحكوم بالإعدام لجرائمه من أجل هذا الرجل الصالح الذي يؤمن به الناس ويتحدثون عن معجزاته، هذه الصدمة التي أرهقته فهو الرجل الصلب القاسي بلا أب، وعند ولادته اعتبرته أمه بأنه لعنه فعاش ملحدًا لا يؤمن بشيء حتى تغير كثيرًا بعد أن قابل المسيح وكان يعتبر نفسه محظوظًا للحياة التي منحت له ولكنه لا يستحق ذلك فبسببه تم إعدام المسيح، وأصبح منبوذًا في المجتمع، ثم سيطرت الشكوك عليه في الله والدين وما بعد الموت.

مشهد التحقيق والمحاكمة في الكتاب المقدس، إنجيل لوقا 23
1. وقامَ الحُضورُ كُلُّهُم وجاؤُوا بِه إلى بـيلاطُسَ، 2. وأخذوا يَتَّهِمونَهُ فيقولونَ وجَدْنا هذا الرَّجُلَ يثيرُ الفِتنَةَ في شَعبِنا، ويَمنَعُهُ أنْ يدفَعَ الجِزيَةَ إلى القَيصَرِ، ويَدَّعي أنَّهُ المسيحُ المَلِكُ. 3. فسألَهُ بِـيلاطُسُ أأنتَ مَلِكُ اليَهودِ فأجابَهُ أنتَ قُلتَ. 4. فقالَ بِـيلاطُسُ لِرُؤساءِ الكَهنَةِ والجُموعِ لا أجِدُ جُرمًا على هذا الرَّجُلِ 5. ولكنَّهُم أصَرُّوا على قولِهِم إنَّهُ يُثيرُ الشَّعبَ بتَعليمِهِ في اليَهوديَّةِ كُلِّها، مِنَ الجَليلِ إلى هُنا. 6. فسألَ بِـيلاطُسُ عِندَما سَمِعَ هذا الكلامَ هَلِ الرَّجُلُ مِنَ الجليلِ 7. فلمَّا عَرفَ أنَّهُ مِنْ ولايَةِ هِيرودُسَ أرسَلَهُ إلى هِيرودُسَ، وهوَ في ذلِكَ الوَقتِ نازِلّ في أُورُشليمَ. 8. فلمَّا رأى هِيرودُسُ يَسوعَ فَرِحَ كثيرًا، لأنَّهُ كانَ يَرغَبُ مِنْ زمان بَعيدٍ أنْ يَراهُ لِكَثرَةِ ما سَمِعَ عَنهُ، ويَرجو أنْ يَشهَدَ آيَةً تَتِمُّ على يدِهِ. 9. فسألَهُ مسائِلَ كثيرةً، فما أجابَهُ عَنْ شيءٍ. 10. وقامَ رُؤساءُ الكَهنَةِ ومُعَلِّمو الشَّريعةِ يَتَّهِمونَهُ ويُشَدِّدونَ علَيهِ التُّهَم. 11. فأهانَهُ هيرودُسُ وجُنودُهُ. وا‏ستَهزَأَ بِه، فألبَسهُ ثَوبًا برّاقًا ورَدَّه إلى بِـيلاطُسَ. 12. وتصَالَحَ هِيرودُسُ وبِـيلاطُسُ في ذلِكَ اليومِ، وكانا مِنْ قَبلُ مُتَخاصِمَينِ. 13. فدَعا بِـيلاطُسُ رُؤساءَ الكَهنَةِ والزُّعَماءَ والشَّعبَ 14. وقالَ لهُم جِئتُم إليَّ بِهذا الرَّجُلِ وقُلتُم إنَّهُ يُضلِّلُ الشَّعبَ. فَفَحَصتُهُ أمامَكُم، فما وجَدْتُ أنَّهُ ا‏رتكَبَ شَيئًا ممَّا تتَّهِمونَهُ بِه، 15. ولا هِيرودُسُ وجَدَ أيضًا، لأنَّهُ رَدَّهُ إِلينا. فلا شيءَ إذًا فعَلَهُ هذا الرَّجُلُ يَستوجِبُ بِه الموتَ. 16. فسأجلِدُهُ وأُخلي سَبـيلَهُ. [ 17. وكانَ على بِـيلاطُسَ أنْ يُطلِقَ لهُم في كُلِّ عيدٍ واحدًا مِنَ السُّجناءِ]. 18. فَصاحوا بِصوتٍ واحدٍ أقتُلْ هذا الرَّجُلَ وأطلِقْ لنا باراباسَ 19. وكان�� باراباسُ في السِّجنِ لا‏شتِراكِهِ في فِتنةٍ وقَعَت في المدينةِ، ولا‏رْتكابِهِ جَريمةَ قَتل. 20. فخاطبَهُم بِـيلاطُسُ ثانيةً لأنَّهُ كانَ يُريدُ أنْ يُخلِـيَ سَبـيلَ يَسوعَ، 21. فصاحوا إصلِبْهُ إصلِبْهُ 22. فقالَ لهُم ثالثةً أيَّ شَرٍّ فعَلَ هذا الرَّجُلُ لا أجِدُ علَيهِ ما يَستَوجِبُ بِه الموتَ. فسأجلِدُهُ وأُخلي سبـيلَهُ 23. فألحّوا علَيهِ بأعلى أصواتِهِم طالِبـينَ صَلبَهُ، وا‏شتَدَّ صِياحُهُم، 24. فحكَمَ بِـيلاطُسُ أنْ يُجابَ طلَبُهُم، 25. فأطلَقَ الرَّجُلَ الذي طَلَبوهُ، وكانَ في السِّجنِ لِجريمَةِ قَتل وإثارَةِ فِتنةٍ، وأسلَمَ يَسوعَ إلى مَشيئَتِهِم. 26. وبَينَما هُم ذاهِبونَ بِه، أمسَكوا سِمعانَ، وهوَ رَجُلّ قِـيرينيٌّ كانَ راجِعًا مِنَ الحَقلِ، فألقَوا علَيهِ الصَّليبَ ليَحمِلَهُ خَلفَ يَسوعَ.

مشهد آخر مؤثر بَدَر من المسيح عليه السلام، عندما أحضر إليه رجال الدين إمرأة متهمة بالزنى وطالبوا برجمها ليقول جملته العظيمة: مَنْ كَانَ مِنْكُمْ بِلاَ خَطِيئَةٍ فَلْيَرْمِهَا أَوَّلاً بِحَجَر!

وهناك الكثير من المشاهد التي تستحق التأمل.

*

ثم شاهدت الفيلم المستوحى من هذه الرواية باراباس.
Barabbas - 2012
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2535664/


وبعد ذلك شاهدت الفيلم المثير للجدل كعادة الأفلام التي تتحدث عن الأنبياء، والذي يُصور يسوع أو المسيح عيسى ابن مريم منذ الولادة حتى الإعدام.
Son of God
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3210686/?...

[Patrizia · Rating 5 out of 5]

Salvato dalla croce al posto di Cristo, Barabba assiste alla sua morte sul Golgota e ne rimane colpito. È un uomo senza Dio, che vorrebbe tanto riuscire a credere; avverte il peso della solitudine ma non è capace di coltivare rapporti umani. Pochi squarci di luce improvvisi e abbaglianti attraversano la sua vita di uomo ai margini, concepito e generato nell’odio verso il mondo e chi lo ha creato. Dall’inferno delle miniere a una ritrovata luce del sole di Roma, poi il falso bagliore del fuoco che segnerà definitivamente il suo destino e infine la morte, desiderata e temuta. In quel momento estremo

“disse nell’oscurità, come se parlasse con essa: A te raccomando l’anima mia.
Ed esalò lo spirito”.

[Andrei Bădică · Rating 4 out of 5]

Un roman interesant...


"Oamenii aceștia erau strâns legați prin credința aceasta a lor, a tuturor, și aveau grijă ca nu cumva să li se alăture vreun necredincios. Erau frați de credință și-și aveau agapele lor, unde frângeau pâinea împreună ca într-o mare familie unită. Îi lega învățătura lor, acel "să vă iubiți unii pe alții". Dar dacă puteau iubi pe un altul care nu era ca ei, era mai greu de știut."

[Jon Nakapalau · Rating 5 out of 5]

Barabbas sees the death of Jesus but lets others convince him that what he saw was not real. When he comes to realize that the story is true he finds himself in the same position as Jesus...but this time he is ready to accept the truth. A tale of redemption through suffering.

[Hend · Rating 4 out of 5]

The story of Barabbas being unbeliever although he has witnessed the crucifixion eclipse that darkness that accompanied the crucifixion and was supposed to be a miracle and also t he resurrection of Jesus after he had been crucified and buried and his visit to , a man who lived through the resurrection process. All this doesnt prevent him from being a skeptic who cant believe that God could be crucified , and has his own doubts through his journey searching for answers……and peace for his soul and cure for his loneliness that he recognized at the end……in contrary to Sahak who is Faithful Believer and is willing to die for what he believe without witnessing the miracles that Barabbas has , this raise a question ,should faith be taken by mind as Barabbas who suffered the darkness of the soul or by heart like Sahak did and find his own peace… ……

i think Barabbas struggling to believe might have a reflection on Pär life ,his own trial to understand Jesus.......

[ferrigno · Rating 4 out of 5]

Arricchisco la mia collezione di romanzi di argomento biblico con questo vangelo secondo Barabba. Durante la lettura mi sono interrogato molto sul protagonista, un vero misantropo. Un personaggio notevole, raccontato con molta economia e perciò ammantato di mistero. L'incontro con Gesù-incontro a distanza- lo segna. Un mondo d'amore, ma che assurdità è questa? Una possibilità non concessagli, che lo tormenterà per tutta la vita rendendola peggiore, se possibile.
L'autore svela poco dei suoi trascorsi, ma con un piglio da narratore onnisciente, che non trova eguali nel resto del romanzo, svela un dettaglio che nessun personaggio del romanzo può conoscere. A parte questo, un'ottima lettura. Cupa, bruta, scontrosa, ingrata, soffocante, ottima.

[Elze Kmitaite · Rating 5 out of 5]

Skandinaviško egzistencializmo perlas, ne pirmą ir ne paskutinį kartą skaitau ir vis kažkaip labai paliečia. Apie laisvę ir jos naštą, apie tamsą ir šviesą kurios slepias mūsų akyse. (Yra ir lietuviškai)

[Ahmed Oraby · Rating 5 out of 5]

وكان لهم حينئذ أسير مشهور يسمى باراباس.

ففيما هم مجتمعون قال لهم بيلاطس: «من تريدون أن أطلق لكم؟ باراباس أم يسوع الذي يدعى المسيح؟»

ولكن رؤساء الكهنة والشيوخ حرضوا الجموع على أن يطلبوا باراباس ويهلكوا يسوع.

فأجاب الوالي وقال لهم: «من من الاثنين تريدون أن أطلق لكم؟» فقالوا: «باراباس!».

حينئذ أطلق لهم باراباس، وأما يسوع فجلده وأسلمه ليصلب.

هي رواية مذهلة
هذا ما كنت واثقًا منه منذ بدايتها
من أول صفحة تدرك كم العبقرية فيها
رواية تحكي عن الصراع الدائم
بين الإيمان والكفر
في داخل باراباس
المجرم، الحقير. الذي رأي ولم يؤمن
وعندما آن الآوان
كان قد صلب
رواية ممتعة جدًا، رغم صغرها الشديد
كنت أتمنى بالطبع لو كانت أكبر
ولكن لا بأس
تجربة جيدة جدًا مع بار لاجركفيست
ولن تكون الأخيرة

[Eddie Watkins · Rating 4 out of 5]

Barabbas is a poor wretch. You have to feel sorry for him, for through no will or desire or intention of his own he finds himself in the center of one of the most momentous events in human history - his life is spared and Jesus is crucified - but this "resurrection" of Barabbas only makes his life more difficult as he's unprepared to process all the metaphysical implications of the event. He's actually constitutionally incapable of understanding metaphysics; all he understands is life and the fact of death - he prefers to live because he fears death - but suddenly he's thrust into a social web of metaphysical/religious subtleties that he simply can not understand, yet he must deal with because there's no way for him to avoid it - he can't just slip back into his previous life.

There's nothing mature or sophisticated about Barabbas's viewpoints. He's not an atheist, exactly, since to be an atheist requires some struggling with God-issues. He's just a man who has a simple, small, materialist vision of life; and a simple basic fear of death. The course of his life after being spared brings him into contact with believers, but he can not believe. Yet because he happened to be present at certain events in Jesus's life he ends up fortifying the faith of others who didn't see these things firsthand (Barabbas seems to slightly alter his stories to please who's listening). This may be a commentary on the foolishness of people who's faith is strengthened by anecdotal evidence alone, but it also demonstrates the power of pure faith, regardless of the basis for it. This is one of the major themes of this book: faith versus lack of faith and how one or the other affects an individual's relationship with death. There's no real stand on the veracity of Jesus as the Son of God or the claims of his followers. It's the story of a poor wretch who finds himself in a world that is suddenly beyond his understanding.

Lagerkvist's spare and simple prose is the perfect medium for this subject matter. There is nothing extraneous in the text, and this starkness throws all that's written into a clear desert-like light that easily passes through the book/mind membrane with very little distortion so to stimulate the maximum amount of thought and allow free contemplation.

[Mohamed Bayomi · Rating 3 out of 5]

باراباس طبقا للرواية الانجيلية هو ذلك السجين -المجرم قاطع الطريق - الذي طالب اليهود بإطلاق سراحه في عيد الفصح وان يصلب المسيح
ماذا حدث لبارباس بعد ذلك ، ذلك الانسان اللامجدي و اللامنتمي ، ماذا يعني الايمان بالنسبة له ، وهو الشاهد على الصلب ، انه قد رآه حتى انه رأى الظلمة التي سودت السماء فوق رأسه وسط النهار لحظة ، انها معجزة ، لكنها ليست كذلك لبارباس ، ربما وهما ، لا انها ليست معجزة ، انها شيء أخر ، حتى انه قابل ذلك العائد من مملكة الموتى ، الذي أحيي بعد أن مات ، رأه و ايقين ان ذلك الوجه و تلك اليد عرفت الموت قبل ذلك وخبرته ،، لكن ايؤمن بارباس ؟ ،، ايضا لا ، عرف اتباعه الذين عرفوا الاخر و عرف الذين أمنوا ولم يروه
، لكن بارباس , انه يريد أن يؤمن ، يحاول أن يؤمن لكنه لا يستطيع ، لانه يريد أن يفهم اولا

[Joselito Honestly and Brilliantly · Rating 4 out of 5]

Anyone familiar with the story of Jesus Christ's crucifixion would know who Barabbas was. Pilate wanted to release Jesus, "finding no case against (him)" (John 18:38). So facing the crowd, he invoked a Jewish custom during Passover permitting the release of a prisoner on death row. The people however clamored for the release of Barabbas, a murderer and an insurrectionist, and called for Jesus' crucifixion. Pilate argued for Jesus three times (Luke 23:21-22) but the people were insistent. Their shouts had "increased in violence" so Pilate, an astute politician, relented. Vox populi, vox Dei. It was therefore God ordering (or at least allowing) his own crucifixion--if Jesus was indeed God (contra, The Jesus Mystery: Astonishing Clues to the True Identities of Jesus and Paul by Lena Einhorn which was my very first goodreads review, 10 October 2009). This was one of the perplexing thoughts running through the pages of this book. Then one can also ruminate on these: maybe Barabbas was Adam all over again? A symbol for humanity? He merited death for the crimes he committed. But his life was spared because of the man on the cross. I was hoping the fictional post-crucifixion Barabbas would realize that it was not really that he caused Jesus' death, it was rather that this death spared him his life. But Par Lagerkvist didn't go that way. Maybe he thought that wouldn't be true to Barabbas' character who had no philosophy but only a neverending perplexed agony.

What happened to him after he was released? The Bible does not say. From this void, however, came out this novel of admirable inventiveness and powerful imagination. You'll never be able to guess where Lagerkvist would take Barabbas until the end which was as harrowing as the crucifixion of us all would be. And which will make you ask: is it to God that we talk to when we pray, or is it just the darkness?

"The horror is this: in the end, it is simply a picture of empty meaningless blackness." (Watchmen, Alan Moore).

[Nood-Lesse · Rating 2 out of 5]

GERUSALEMME-BETLEMME 0-2

Hanno sempre esercitato un certo fascino su di me i romanzi legati alla passione di Cristo. Mi ero già dedicato in passato al Pilato di Bulgakov (è il pezzo pregiato all’interno de Il maestro e Margherita), al Giuda di Berto e al Vangelo secondo il figlio di Mailer. Sul Barabba avevo legittime aspettative e invece circa a metà libro, mi son ritrovato a pensare a quella battuta che girava negli anni ottanta:
-Chi volete libero, Gesù o Barabba?
-Barabba, Barabba, Barabba...
Va bene, allora Barabba libero e Gesù centravanti, ma poi non venite a brontolare se si perde contro il Betlemme

Il libero non esiste più, ora in difesa si gioca a tre in linea, in alcuni casi a due; il nuovo libero è il portiere, uno che nel calcio moderno deve essere più bravo con i piedi che con le mani, uno che imposta che permette la superiorità numerica e l’apertura di linee multiple di passaggio. Oggi il libero per eccellenza non è più Barabba Baresi ma bensì Andrè Onana.
Il libro mi ha deluso, credo si possa iniziare ad intuirlo. Raramente una prefazione (che le fazioni siano pre o post io le leggo comunque alla fine) è riuscita a spiegarmene così bene i motivi.

- Lagerkvist conduce il racconto non per trame ma per scene (forse, stazioni), secondo le strutture tradizionali del dramma religioso;
- La pittura svedese di Lagerkvist - che è tutt'uno con l'aspetto teatrale per le ambientazioni, i costumi, le luci, i timbri e i suoni delle colorazioni, ché in questo dramma, naturalmente, musica non c'è - è una molto bella commistione di quella italiana d'un Masaccio o d'un Mantegna, con quella, più brulicante, di certi tedeschi come Altdorfer o Cranach e, da solo, Rembrandt.
(Alessandro Ceni)

Ecco cosa mi ha disturbato: la suddivisione in quadri, in scene teatrali: non è cinema è fumetto; non è flusso di coscienza, sono schizzi di coscienza; non è un tema è un test; Questo libro è un catalogo più che un romanzo.
P.F. Lagerkvist scrisse Barabba nel 1950, un anno prima di ricevere il Nobel e che lo rivelò al grande pubblico.
Bisogna usare cautela con questi Nobel nordici, sembrano assegnati per nepotismo più che per merito. Mi era già capitato di pensare qualcosa di simile leggendo il norvegese Knut Hamsun. Se prima a Stoccolma premiavano soprattutto i conterranei, ora per far mostra di essere aperti al mondo han cominciato ad assegnare il premio come se fosse il biglietto vincente di una lotteria, cioè più o meno a caso. L’equivoco (parlo per me) penso nasca dal fatto che il Nobel io vorrei vederlo assegnato a qualcuno che scrive e scrive meglio degli altri, non ad un musico, ad un teatrante, ad un kamikaze giapponese mancato. Ma è appunto un equivoco e qui in maniera sintetica è spiegato il perché
https://www.actualidadliteratura.com/...

Il Barabba di Lagerkvist è un personaggio di totale invenzione, qui inizia e finisce il merito del suo creatore. Se Alessandro Ceni ha visto giusto, gli amanti della pittura potrebbero apprezzare i quadri presenti in questo catalogo meglio di come sono stato in grado di fare io.

[amapola · Rating 5 out of 5]

E’ stato scritto che tutta l'opera di Lagerkvist sembra scossa dall’urto dell'esigenza di significato e consiste in un’oscillazione tra fede e dubbio: sempre a un passo da Dio, ora pregato, implorato e, subito dopo, avvertito come impossibile. Questo Dio sfuggente è costantemente presente nell’opera di Lagerkvist, esplorato in tutte le sue possibili concezioni e rappresentazioni, con accanimento e con profondità vertiginosa.
In questo romanzo la figura di Barabba è contraddittoria: egli agisce come entità autonoma, concepisce solo se stesso e nessun altro; non sa fidarsi di quel che vede, né tantomeno legarsi a qualcuno. A un uomo come lui accade di incontrare Cristo. Non Lo capisce, ma ne è segnato per sempre. Non si potrà mai più togliere di dosso il volto dell’Uomo che lo ha incomprensibilmente salvato. Incontrerà poi Pietro e i discepoli, ma niente e nessuno lo distoglierà dalle sue ambiguità.
Così da Gerusalemme, passando per Cipro, Barabba giunge a Roma. Il 18 luglio del 64 scambia le fiamme dell’incendio della capitale per il segno del ritorno di Cristo. Arrestato, incontra nelle carceri Pietro e gli altri, che Nerone ha accusato di essere gli autori del disastro e con loro, ma separato da loro, attende di essere giustiziato.

Quando sentì appressarsi la morte, della quale aveva sempre avuto tanta paura, disse nell’oscurità, come se parlasse con essa: “A te raccomando l’anima mia”. Ed esalò lo spirito.

Le stesse parole che aveva sentito tanti anni prima, quando – in disparte, come sempre – fu testimone della crocifissione di Cristo.

[Ray · Rating 4 out of 5]

A short tale involving Barabbas, the thief who was pardoned so that Jesus could be crucified. It follows him through his life after the pardon, as he witnesses at first hand the rise of the cult of Jesus as it develops from an obscure Jewish sect into a faith that will threaten and eventually subvert the mighty Roman empire.

Whilst not a believer, time and time again Barabbas is drawn to the persecuted group, fascinated as to why a man's life and death could evoke such devotion and sacrifice. In the end he is swept up in a round of persecution and dies with a group of Christians.

Throughout the story Barabbas is portrayed as an outsider, cursed by what he is, what he has done and what he has witnessed. After what he has seen - a seemingly normal person suffering the agony of crucifixion - how can he believe in Jesus as the son of god? Despite this he finds the fervent belief of others very powerful.

A simple tale well told. I found it a good book, worth exploring.

[Caleb CW · Rating 5 out of 5]

Amazing. Simply amazing.

There it is and there you have it.

[Jasminka · Rating 5 out of 5]

Mislim da nema hrišćanskih vernika (ali i ateista kao ja, koji se interesuju za sve) koji ne zna ko je Baraba (Ili Varava) – to je čovek koji je oslobođen krivice umesto Isusa Hrista . Samim tim je i jedina osoba zbog koje je Isus Hrist bukvalno umro. Šta se s njim dogodilo nakon što je pušten, Biblija ne kaže. Iz te praznine je, međutim, Lagerkvist sklopio ovaj roman zadivljujuće inventivnosti i mašte, za Barabu je stvorio čitav jedan život. Pošto Baraba živi zato što je Isus umro za njega, on ima vrlo direktnu vezu sa njim, bliži je Hristu od bilo koga drugog i ne može da ga izbaci iz glave, iako ga nikad nije upoznao, a video ga je tek pre nego što je na krstu na Golgoti ispustio dušu u mukama. Dva totalno suprotna karaktera: Isus, okružen svojim učenicima i majkom koji sa tugom i suzama u očima gledaju njegovu mučeničku i dobrovoljnu smrt, nejgovu žrtvu za spas čovečanstva i šire njegovui poruku o ljubavi i nakon njegove smrti i Baraba – pun mržnje, nasilan, grub, razbojnik, ubica, nesposoban za dublje emocije. Njegov otac je bio razbojnik, majka ga je rodila proklinjući svet koji je Isus trebao blagosloviti. Ali, njihovi se putevi ukrštavaju i Baraba ne zna što bi sam sa sobom. U glavi mu odzvanjaju reči „Ljubi bližnjega svoga“ nakon što mu je njegova družbenica Zečja Usta objasnila smisao Učiteljovog učenja. Šta je ljubav mogla značiti za Barabu kojeg je mrzela čak i njegova majka od trenutka kada je prvi put udahnuo? Koji nikada nije osetio nikakvu emocionalnu vezu sa drugim ljudskim bićem? Ipak u njemu postoji ta žudnja – da veruje u nešto, da veruje u Isusovo učenje. Ali, stalno se vraća na pitanja koja ga zbunjuju, muče: „Mesija koji bi dozvolio da bude razapet... Ko je već čuo ovako nešto?... Koji su to luđaci koji veruju u takve stvari?”. Zašto prihvatiti smrt, kome bi ova smrt koristila? Odgovor učenika ga ne zadovoljava. A on to ne može ni da razume: Isus je „nevino stradao i umro umesto nas... krivi smo mi [ljudi], a ne on“.
On je skeptičan pojedinac, toliko bi želeo da veruje, ali ne može. Ne možete da verujete u nešto prosto jer to želite. Vera nije odluka. Barabu ne ubeđuje nijedna priča, nijedan dokaz. Posećuje Lazara, vaskrslog posle četiri dana nakon smrti, i dobija zadivljujući odgovor: „Smatraš li da bi trebao da ti pričam o carstvu smrti? Ne mogu tako nešto. Carstvo smrti je ništa. Postoji – ali je ništa”.
Završi kao rob u rudniku bakra. Uz Sahaka, hrišćanina, čoveka koji je s njim osuđen da bude zajedno na lancu, uči da se moli, ali odustaje nakon nekog vremena, jer ne razume smisao molitve. Sahak je izveden iz rudnika i zahteva da se i Baraba oslobodi, misleći da je i on sledbenik Hrista. Postaju kućni robovi rimskog tužioca, prate ga čak u Rim. Opsesija da pronađe odgovor ga ne napušta.
Lagrekvist u knjizi istražuje i prirodu vere, pitanja vere i sujeverja. Spominju se gubavci i robovi koji željno iščekuju pojavu Mesije, a samim tim nadaju se na bolji život. Ovi ljudi iz nižih klasa koji nemaju drugog načina da se sprave sa mukotrpnim životom, spremni su da se uhvate za sve što im daje nadu. A usred svega, Baraba stoji sam, uzaludno pokušavajući da se izbori sa sumnjom i željom u sebi.
„“Ja nemam boga“, odgovorio je na kraju Varava...
“Zašto onda nosiš ovo „Isus Hristos“ urezan na svom disku?“
“Zato što želim da verujem“, rekao je Varava...“

Hteo je da veruje. Ali ipak nije razumeo.

[Czarny Pies · Rating 3 out of 5]

Barabbas is an addition to the new testament written by an atheist. It is far more likely to please those who have fallen away from the faith than someone who is a believer.

The person of Barabbas is a very familiar figure to anyone with a Christian upbringing. The story of Christ's passion is read every year on Palm Sunday and on Good Friday. Thus you hear the story twice a year how Pilate tells the crowd that they have the right to obtain the pardon of one condemned man every year and suggests that they request it for Jesus. Instead, the crowd asks that Barabbas a common bandit be pardoned. Jesus of course cannot be the one to receive the pardon, because he came into the world to be crucified. For this reason Barabbas survives.

The first time that a child hears the story, he or she is shocked. The second time, the child wants to know what happened to Barabbas afterwards. This is the great hook that Lagerkvist uses so brilliantly. Everyone wants to know what happened to Barabbas including those who should not. An adult who is believes in Christ understands that some mysteries will never be revealed to us during our lives on this earth. Reading Barabbas is then a very impious exercise.

Lagerkvist however plays the game very well. He understands that his reader wants to know what purpose God had in mind for Barabbas. Was he supposed to be simply an unwitting collaborator in the scheme to crucify Christ? Did Barabbas ever come to believe in Christ? Was he saved?

Lagerkvist's Barabbas wants to believe in Christ but his nature prevents him from accepting a God who preaches love and forgiveness. Barabbas wants rough justice. When a crowd stones a follower of Christ, Barabbas responds by murdering the person who threw the first stone. When Nero starts a fire in Rome with the purpose of blaming it on the Christian, Barabbas rushes out with a torch to set houses alight.

Barabbas is arrested and crucified. His final utterance however is cryptic. The reader cannot be sure whether Barabbas has indeed embraced Christ (albeit in a very perverse fashion) or if he has committed himself to a different more violent God. The ending this is both ambiguous and dishonest. After having lured the reader in with the promise of telling the story of Barabbas, Lagerkvist finally chooses not to tell the reader what happened to him at the end.

[Fatema Hassan , bahrain · Rating 4 out of 5]

رواية قصيرة ولكنها كفيلة بتعريف القارئ على شخصية باراباس و هو السجين الذي أُطلق سراحه و صُلب ( يسوع الناصري) النبي عيسى عليه السلام بدلًا منه، ستتعرف من خلال الرواية أيضًا على حقبة مهمة و مفصلية في النشأة الأولى للديانة المسيحية تمثلت في التعاضد الروحي بين معتنقي الدين المسيحي رغم عدم تقبل نزعتهم الدينية لا من قبل الرومان ولا اليهود و هم كانوا وجوه المجتمع المهمة آنذاك، كان المسيحيون يمهدون فيما بينهم لدينهم بالتلاحم حول مبادئ المسيح و يجازفون بأرواحهم و يختارون طوعًا - كأي معتنق لديانة جديدة- الدين على أنه المنفى الذي لا بد من تقبل مرارته و عبوره مهما كان حجم الخطر، باراباس كان الامتحان الصعب ليس لنفسه فقط بل لكل مسيحي في ذلك العهد، فبينما كان متخندق في تيهه بين الإيمان بنبوة المسيح والإلحاد بدلائل نبوته والتي رآها بأم العين ،صار مجرد ذكر اسمه امتحان لقلوب المسيحين إذ هل يقدرون على تطبيق شعار المسيح ( ليحب أحدكم الآخر) حتى مع الرجل الذي تم استبداله بالمسيح على الصليب؟ هل يتغير إيمانهم بمبادئ المسيح في تعاملهم مع الصديق عنه مع العدو أم هو ساري المفعول في الحالتين؟ عدوٌ فيه عِبر الدنيا مثل باراباس فهو قاتل أبوه إلياهو و قدقتل العديد من الناس كذلك ومثل بجثثهم و سرق و عاث في الأرض الفساد! هل سيتقبل المسيحيون توبته بعد إيمان متذبذب كان يتصارع داخله ؟ تحققت نبوءة المسيح بأنه سيتعذب و يقتل من أجل اتباعه وبعدها سيقوم من جديد، أتباعه يؤمنون بالقدر الذي سيلاقيه كما أخبرهم لكن بلومهم ونبذهم لباراباس ووصفهم إياه بالشرير تناقض بين المصدق بكلمات المسيح عن قدره و بين المتتبع للغريزة الانسانية حد الجهالة في تقريع باراباس !

ذروة إبداع الرواية :
كلمات نبي الله وهو معلق على الصليب و الإظلام يعمي البصر و يفتح البصائر :
إلهي .. إلهي .. لما تركتني؟
( كلمات تنافي كمال الربوبية فهي إنسانية حقيقية مشككة من فم النبي ستُصعب مهمة المعتنق لديانة جديدة يبشر لها حتمًا، وهي مدعاة للتأمل تمنيت لو أفسح لها مجالاً في الرواية )

كلمات باراباس وهو معلق على الصليب و يخاطب الظلام الذي سيتلقف روحه :
إليك أسلم روحي ..
( ما الذي انتصر في باراباس في نهاية يومه ؟خير الغد أم شره؟ )

هل ثمة نسبة شك في كل يقين مهما كان قويًا؟ وثمة يقين في قلب كل شك ؟

[Olivia · Rating 2 out of 5]

Simplicity can be a great advantage in telling a story. Many great writers have used very spartan ways, and still left an impression far from one-dimensional. Doing this is tricky. It includes using little to tell a lot, there has to be something lurking underneath, a richness for the reader to decipher. Here starts the trouble I have with Barabbas. It is not only written sparingly, but doesn't really seem to hold more than the bare words that are strung together.

When picking this book from the shelf, I was looking for a portrait of the psychological torments a man like Barabbas might go through. I think I was hoping for something along the lines of Bulgakov's portrayal of Pontius Pilatus. I'm very intrigued by religious and psychological themes, and the story of Barabbas sounded tainted with the guilt of being alive, the trauma of having nearly been crucified, and an unhealthy obsession with the man who was sacrificed in his place. These things are somewhat brought up, but only in passing. The story moves quickly, Lagerkvist doesn't linger on nearly anything, and we do not learn much about the inner world of Barabbas. Lagerkvist almost seems uninterested. The book simply feels drained of enthusiasm, wonder, or curiosity. Things happen, but we don't register them, there is no importance applied to anything, and you can't help but wonder what Lagerkvist is here to tell.

The other problem I had with this book is the way of writing. It is very repetitive, but doesn't seem to be so in any intentional way. The same words are used again and again, and without any apparent (aesthetic or other) reason. Rather, this makes the book feel unimaginative, and again, uninspired. I don't feel as if I'm taking anything with me from reading this book. I guess I just long too much for fleshed-out psychological discussion (especially paired with religion and its impact). Unfortunately, it seems like I will have to look for this somewhere else.

[Brian · Rating 3 out of 5]

Like a lost gnostic gospel (The Gospel of Christ according to Barabbas?), this novel strums the chords of belief, regret, yearning and loss. Using the death and resurrection of Christ as the backdrop for the released prisoner Barabbas's story is clever and there are many unique and ineresting fictions created by Lagerkvist to tell his hero's tale.

It might have been the translation, but Lagerkvist's writing style didn't resonate with me at all. I'm not ready to give up on him; I'll try a couple of his other works with different translators before moving on.