The Lord’s Prayer and Monadology

――Joseph Ratzinger, formerly Pope Benedict XVI, returned to heaven on 31 December 2022. Before his death he published Jesus of Nazareth, another major work. One of the three volumes was published during his pontificate – his commentary will be used to develop the meaning of the words of prayer and Leibniz’s planned harmonies and monads.

Common denominator.

Leibniz: harmony in the face of conflict between Catholicism and Protestantism.

Benedict XVI: Harmony against the conflicts of religion and time.

Monadology: by Leibniz.

Consists of 90 chapters but is a fragment. Derived from the Greek word monas (single, one). Leibniz, who lived at a time of conflict between Catholics and Protestants, searched for the ultimate harmony, the One, which is uniqueness. A mathematical-geometric point is a point

 of its own, also an abstract conceptual position. but, it is not an existential position. Nevertheless, an existential position must be a ‘many’ as a one with priniciple. Like a flock of sheep. The centre of a circle is a dot, while it holds an infinite number of diameters. The spirit is itself, but has an infinity of past, present and future representations. The spirit, which is not existentially immanent, but the spirit expresses and represents the many. ‘Representation’ and ‘expression’ are the key concepts of Leibniz’s Monadology.

  1. First
  2. ⅠOur Father, who art in heaven
  3. Ⅱ hallowed be thy name
  4. Ⅲ Thy kingdom come
  5. Ⅵ The will be done on earth as it is in Heaven
  6. Ⅴ Give us this day our daily bread and forgive us
  7. Ⅵ our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us
  8. Ⅶ and lead us not into temptation
  9. Ⅷ but deliver us from evil.
  10. Last: Division does not keep simple love alive.
  11. Reference


If the Lord’s Prayer, which I recite daily, allows for both Obedience and Desire, when will my words become sacred? No one can decide that. Prayer has the skyline of the human heart. That is the analogue of human beings, and that is why Descartes’ cogito ergosum is not enough, and there is always me who is not aware of it. The words I chant are more complete than my awareness. That is the language of prayer. The unaware I, the ” small I”, is Leibnizian in its monadic nature. A typical Catholic language of prayer is described as.

Our Father, who art in heaven hallowed be thy name; thy kingdom come; thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread and forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us; and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. Amen.

 Prayer is not only directed to God, but also questions the depths of the self. Naturally, we find ourselves constantly questioning who it is that we are praying to, the ‘I’. Many commentaries on prayer say, “Do not pray so that you can be seen in public” (Matthew 6), but for the Japanese, who have a strong sense of syncretism, it is more important to look at the self. Even though there are many desires and selfishness, it is difficult to look at one’s own identity. What the prayer confirms is ‘we’, the community. The Japanese are awakening to what they are as part of that, and to the fact that I, as part of the community, am the only one in the world.

Prayer that is merely sympathetic to a poorly thought-out community is more common today. Leibniz’s famous ‘Monad’ was difficult to serve as an example because it was less familiar than Descartes and modern philosophy. Nevertheless, I decided to write a commentary on the Lord’s Prayer, which he wrote before Benedict XVI (Joseph Ratzinger) returned from serious illness, because it was moving and reminded me of the Monad. Leibniz lived at a time when Catholics and Protestants were in conflict, but Leibniz was a man who thought of a philosophy that would bring harmony, as if preserving an unsolvable mystery.

For a person of belief, God is absolute and self-consciousness is easily a Cartesian starting point for self-consciousness, whereas for a non-believer it begins with convictions. Faith is spiritual and does not require a basis. However, it does not mean living a meaningless life. Beliefs and the faith of others do not have a window and do not intersect. But it is flexible, like the soul. 

Leibniz found micro-organisms under the microscope that could not be found with the naked eye for everything that has life, animals and plants, and that there is also an unknown universe. Since Descartes, ‘thinking’ by one’s consciousness has been the highest discovery, while in the Leibniz philosophy ‘expression’ and ‘representation’ are the basic action. Naturally, Catholic prayer is a man-centred, conscious prayer, but the fact that the phenomenon is not an ‘appearance’ (Schein ) and the action of the spirit is not an entity but a ‘subject’ was the basis of German idealism, but the reason for the existence of prayer is not an appearance, but an expression, which contains a single point, It can be said to represent the infinity of numerous diameters that compose a single point, God, including the center. (The image is not of God and man perpendicular to heaven and earth, but of a circle with God in the centre)

ⅠOur Father, who art in heaven

――This discretion, which is of the very essence of prayer, does not exclude prayer in common. The Our Father is itself a prayer uttered in the first person plural, and it is only by becoming part of the “we” of God’s children that we can reach up to him beyond the limits of this world in the first place. And yet this “we” awakens the inmost core of the person; in the act of prayer the totally personal and the communal must always pervade each other, as we will see more closely in our exposition of the Our Father. Benedict XVI, Pope . Jesus of Nazareth (p.129). The Crown Publishing Group. Kindle 版.――

How strongly can we be aware of the word Father, we cannot basically see him with the naked eye. In theology, the Lord Father is the root of all good things and the measure of a righteous (perfect) man. ‘But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. ” (Matthew 5.44 and following)

This love that loves “to the extreme” (John 13) is fulfilled in the Lord’s prayer for his enemies on the cross, and shows the essence of the Father. The Father is this love. Jesus fulfilled this love, making him fully ‘the Son’. The original of this prayer is part of the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 6. (Luke: 6)

It is a comprehensive statement of the right human way of being. Nevertheless, John Paul II wrote something interesting on this question of why God is not manifested before us.

From one point of view it is right to say that God revealed too much of Himself to man, too much of that which is most divine, that which is His intimate life; He revealed Himself in His Mystery. He was not mindful of the fact that such an unveiling would in a certain way obscure Him in the eyes of man, because man is not capable of withstanding an excess of the Mystery.  Paul II, Pope John. Crossing the Threshold of Hope (p.37). Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group. Kindle 版.

‟Reasons certainly do exist to believe in Him; but—as many have maintained and still maintain—there are also reasons to doubt, or even deny, His existence” So, John Paul II is also quoted here in Descartes’ ‘I think, therefore I am’.‟ It states that this sprouted from the philosophy of rationalism on a different soil from Thomas Aquinas and St Thomas.” No different from St Thomas who said “for whom it is not thought which determines existence, but existence, “esse” which determines thought”.Jesus was executed because he publicly declared that he was the Son of God.  That was fair in terms of the legislation at the time. John Paul II did not hide the fact that getting too close to the mystery brings tragedy to human beings, one aspect of which he did not hide.

There is deduction and induction, but Leibniz tried to develop from simple truths by deduction. In principle, ‘Our Father’ is absolute, so there is no hypothesis. Therefore, the basis of theology is deduction. Leibniz’s rationalism developed by deduction was opposed, among other things, to empiricism. If it were derived from experience, religious rituals would not proceed, since it is a philosophy about God, from which it was not removed. He took the further position that certain perceptions were innate and derived from evidential principles.

The novel Sophie’s World tells an interesting story. A non-religious astronaut bragged that he had seen space many times but there was no God. A Christian doctor said. I have had many brain operations but no ‘thoughts’. Sophie replies. ‘But the soul cannot even be divided into two.

Thoughts are quite different from things that can be chopped up into smaller pieces, and delusions cannot be surgically removed. Leibniz said that the difference between what is made of matter and everything that emanates from the spirit is that material things can be divided into smaller parts to any extent. The soul, however, cannot be cut into there are two sides of God’s Fatherhood. The Gospels confirm that God being Father has two aspects. God is our Creator and our Father. Since he created us, we belong to God. As existence itself, it is the essence of the biblical picture of man that God created each and every human being. But what does it mean to accept this? If we try to convince ourselves of this only through ontology and empiricism, we can only create a polarisation of believing and not believing. Naturally, many people today will not believe.

>Thinking as a monad.


 Humans are made up of a heart and a brain, but simply piecing them together does not create an ‘I’. So too is God, and God is not made by combining only the languages described by the various Bibles. It is fair to say that this is where the difficulty of proselytising lies. It is that causality alone is difficult for them to understand and even to exist. The empiricist Hume did not believe in the existence of angels, so he told them to burn their theology books. Leibniz was adamant about that one point, ‘God’, which cannot be spoken of by experience alone.

Monads always exist separately, independently and without windows. No matter how often a prayer is explained, there is no fixed point where the goal is. This is because it inevitably requires experience. Explanations are merely to help with feelings, but the language of prayer always exists apart from experience. Its culmination is ‘Our Father’. 

While it is possible to consider prayer only in its literal meaning, some people try to understand the details of the word by tracing it back to its etymology. They assume that all the time spent praying is worthwhile, even though their understanding is incomplete. The language of prayer emphasises what kind of people we should be and that we should be irreverent with ‘us’ rather than a heightened ‘ego’.

There is a part of us that is me. The I is inherent in us.

(I do not subscribe to any teaching that causes the loss of the ‘I’. I dislike and strongly reject such religious people)

Monadology is predicate-dominant, with the subject containing the predicate. It is the predicate that is important to God, for example, ‘God is love’. God is not prominently illuminated only by being God. We should not follow for that reason alone. We must focus on the predicate of what God is. The words of the prayer do not relegate God the Father to a star somewhere far away, but that He comes from the One Father, who is the measure and source of the Father. That God is the Father has a greater reality than all earthly fathers have.

we are testifying to the fact that, while we have different earthly fathers, we all come from one single Father,……

God’s fatherhood is more real than human fatherhood, because he is the ultimate source of our being; because he has thought and willed us from all eternity; because he gives us our true paternal home, which is eternal. And if earthly fatherhood divides, heavenly fatherhood unites. Heaven, then, means that other divine summit from which we all come and to which we are all meant to return.

Benedict XVI, Pope . Jesus of Nazareth (pp.141-142). The Crown Publishing Group. Kindle 版.

-In order to distinguish between the action of God and the action of the creature, it is necessary to clarify what the concept of an individual entity (1) is (Metaphysical Narrative, 8) Description of predicate superiority

The changeable state which grasps and represents a multiplicity in one or the other is nothing other than what is called sensation or perception, which is to be distinguished from apperception or consciousness, as will be seen in what follows.(Monadologie v14)

And the action or activity of the inner principle that causes the change or progress from one perception to another can be called desire.(Monadologie v15)

And one creature is more perfect than another / in so far as one perceives in it / something from which one can deduce a priori the reason for what occurs in another thing; and by this one says / that it grows into another creature.(Monadologie v51)

Ⅱ hallowed be thy name

God named his existence in Exodus 3:14, “I am the one who says, ‘I am'”. There were many gods in the time of Moses in the Ten Commandments, “Thou shalt not defile the name of God”. Therefore, Moses asked God for his name in order to demonstrate God’s special authority over those gods. In the world’s view of ‘polytheism’, God has a name. God must answer as long as he is asked. The god who spoke to Moses also had to have a name. 

God could not enter the world of the gods with a name as one of them. God’s answer, “I am the one who says, ‘I am’,” expresses both agreement and rejection of Moses’ question. It is therefore correct that the name of God as presented in JHWH should not be pronounced in Israel. God’s name must not be downgraded to polytheism. That leaves the question of what God’s judgement is the Name. Names enable us to call out, but do not indicate our true nature. Adam in Genesis gave the animals names in order to call them. God also made it possible for humans to be called, and then accepted to be hurt. This makes it clear what is meant by the words of the prayer, “HALLOWED BE THY NAME”

We can cling to God in our daily lives some days and forget others. Including such lowered routines, we pray that God will be raised up with ‘HALLOWED BE THY NAME’. God’s answer to the name deserves, in monadology, to be ‘revealed’. The hidden presence of God has been revealed. It must not be a temporary representation. The name of God is not decomposed, (Monadology, v. 4) and the one who prays is doomed to neither generation nor end by God, but to perish by extinction. (ibid., v. 6) The praying side exists with a nature. Each nature must be different. (Ibid., v. 6) Each nature must be different from the other, for what happens in the composite always comes from a single element. But the praying side cannot distinguish between souls. In the single ‘God’. (ibid., v. 8) the principle of sufficient reason, why A is A and not other than A, is sufficiently fulfilled. It also follows that no proposition is just. (ibid., v. 32) While it is done only by the principle of memory, it is the same as the beast (ibid., v. 28) Today, even if it is a day of unenlightenment, experiencing and remembering are not the only means. When we pray on this day, we are praying to “God”, “the Father, the Lord”, whose presence demands the elevation of human holiness.

his plea, of course, is always an occasion for us to examine our consciences seriously. How do I treat God’s holy name?……Do I stand in reverence before the mystery of the burning bush, before his incomprehensible closeness, even to the point of his presence in the Eucharist, where he truly gives himself entirely into our hands? Do I take care that God’s holy companionship with us will draw us up into his purity and sanctity, instead of dragging him down into the filth? Benedict XVI, Pope . Jesus of Nazareth (pp.144-145). The Crown Publishing Group. Kindle 版.

Ⅲ Thy kingdom come

This passage is often misunderstood even by clergy, but even Benedict XVI did not say here that wishing for God’s kingdom will promise a paradise. If anyone, even believers, speaks of religion making them happy, they are not studying hard enough. The life of faith is not a simple matter of abandoning something and automatically moving up in status. The Kingdom of God is the rule of God, which means that God’s will is the standard for everything.

This divine will makes justice, and divine justice should be the measure of human justice. ‘But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well.” (Matthew 6:33) These words give order of priority to all human conduct, to our behaviour in everyday life. Then everything else will be given to you” (Matthew 6:33) These words give order of priority to all human conduct, to our behaviour in everyday life. In the Old Testament, there is this story. The Lord appeared to the young king in a dream and told him to wish for whatever he liked, because he would listen to any wish. Solomon told the people to be able to judge between good and evil. God commended Solomon because he did not choose ego, but asked for what was essential. ‘May the kingdom come’ is ruled by the Lord, but to have a listening and discerning heart, that is the essential desire. He prays for the dispersed and separated humanity to judge good and evil, so that in time it will become one.

The soul is given the function by memory to seek connections between memories. This function is similar to, but distinct from, reason. It can be compared to an animal: a dog that has been hit with a stick will run away the next time (Monadology, xxvi), but humans contain contradictions and do not choose solely on the basis of causality. Humans take even God’s treatment as a trial. Like Job and Jeremiah. Even if the scene in front of them is peaceful, there is war and misery in the land of the invisible. Or perhaps he is unhappy himself. It is important to be fulfilled like the kingdom of heaven and to vow to pass justice for it. Do not pray while you sleep that when you wake up the world will have been a heavenly kingdom. To choose righteousness every day. That is what we chant. This conformity with the only one, the hope for conformity because it cannot be fulfilled, the impulse behind the rational language, the power to seek the mystery is contained in its contradiction, but I think it is pure (cf. Ibid., pp. 49-62).

The encounter with Christ makes this petition even deeper and more concrete……

By the same token, the request for a listening heart becomes a request for communion with Jesus Christ, the petition that we increasingly become “one” with him (Gal 3:28). What is requested in this petition is the true following of Christ, which becomes communion with him and makes us one body with him.

Benedict XVI, Pope . Jesus of Nazareth (pp.146-147). The Crown Publishing Group. Kindle 版.

Ⅵ The will be done on earth as it is in Heaven

Two things are immediately clear from the words of this petition: God has a will with and for us and it must become the measure of our willing and being; and the essence of “heaven” is that it is where God’s will is unswervingly done.

Benedict XVI, Pope . Jesus of Nazareth (p.147). The Crown Publishing Group. Kindle 版.

Numerous holy books assume that man knows the will of God in his heart, that the knowledge of God, called conscience, is deeply rooted in the heart. In Matthew 26:36-46, Jesus came to Gethsemane with his disciples and said, ‘Sit here while I go over there and pray’. He was accompanied by Peter’s and the two sons of Zebedee, who were sorrowful at that time. Jesus prayed thus, saying. ‘Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from me. But not according to my wish, but according to your will” In this case, the cup is the cross, and Jesus was grieved that he would be killed by this wrong judgement. Therefore, he asked God’s will, not my wish. But God did not answer as Solomon did. This ‘not according to my wish but according to His will’ is taken up by Thomas Aquinas. Jesus then turns to a story about a traitor trying to kill him, and that is how we learn the will of God with Jesus. And it is hoped that this means that even our self-love is defeated.

Aristotle held that the perfect reality is entelecheia. Leibniz states that entelecheia always has an order. (Monadology, v. 63) In simple terms, it is a plant. The plant repeats itself according to the same laws and with the same number of petals. Leibniz’s monadology deals mainly with God’s creation in verses 62 to 66. And with regard to the subsequent verses 67 to 80, it refers to what cannot be explained by order as preestablished harmony. Although this is objectionable, a preestablished harmony is a law that can’t be unravelled. No matter how abstractly and infinitely one speaks of philosophy and theology, even if prime factors are given and finer numbers are given, as in prime factorisation, they do not exceed the original natural number. For example, if we do a prime factorisation of the natural number 60, we get 2 x 2 x 3 x 5 = 60. (Only 13 is a prime factor, so the prime factorisation is 13.) However, God can be likened to the prime number ‘1’ and the natural numbers that are bracketed as prime factors are us, but as long as God is the solution, it is a mystery until we experience the solution. Prime factors are only one expression. And even if the vague view is a scheduled harmony, it is not causal or easy to understand. What God has prepared will never exceed the size of creation, no matter how much it is dismantled and divided by man. Yet the magnitude is unimaginable. To live in this world is The only clues to the mystery left by Jesus were ‘love’ and ‘justice’. It must bring the wounded closer to the ability to notice them, to reach out to them and to help them. Otherwise the kingdom of God will not come.

The gravitational pull of our own will constantly draws us away from God’s will and turns us into mere “earth.” But he accepts us, he draws us up to himself, into himself, and in communion with him we too learn God’s will.

Benedict XVI, Pope . Jesus of Nazareth (p.150). The Crown Publishing Group. Kindle 版.

Ⅴ Give us this day our daily bread and forgive us

This passage is the most ‘human’ petition in the Lord’s Prayer. To the disciples, the Lord says, “Before I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink; or about your body, what you will wear” (Matt. 6:25), and the mission of the people is to food The mission of the people was to pray about their worries about food. Bread is the bounty of the earth, the fruit of labour. This is opposed to the arrogance of the people, who say that they realise the fertility by their own strength alone. Give us daily bread”, the Greek word for ‘daily’ is EPIOUSIOS, which can be translated in two ways. One is ‘the bread we barely need to live’ and the other is ‘the bread of the future’.

It also signifies the bread of the eschatological end. Bread is purely edible. It is difficult to realise for rice staples, but the staple food is necessary for the survival of life, and it is important in daily life that this is available. That bread, that thing, is to be the Logos. From there it becomes religious.

‘Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God” (Matthew 4:4) The bread increased by miracles reminds us of the miracle and shows that the original food of man is the Logos, the eternal Word of God. The eternal Logos becomes the bread of reality for man. It corresponds to the food presented to the Israelites by Moses as a gift of God. What would happen if we were to speak of it as a philosophy? The bread that the poor wish for is a mystery that wishes for the necessities of the day, so resolution is not require.

If we dare to speak of the lack of the rule of reason, bearing in mind that this is the first condition, we begin with an account of ‘Buridan’s donkey’ (Buridan’s ass). Buridan the donkey has found a bundle of straw, his favourite food. However, Buridan also noticed another bundle of straw that he could see looking back. The donkey was clever enough to wonder which one he was going to eat. So Buridan couldn’t decide and starved to death. This is similar to the foolish consequence of starving to death because one is wise and rational, and to the fact that one should not look for a philosophical basis, doxa, in the bread of communion. This Buridan is said to be a French philosopher, but the actual source is unknown. Leibniz, however, gives it in a parable in his theodicy. 

The donkey that starved to death is foolish, but because of its foolishness, a principle emerges. When food and sacredness coincide, it means that everything loses its meaning if it is not simply accepted as daily sustenance.

Every time we pray daily, “GIVE US THIS DAY OUR DAILY BREAD”, both the “I” who understands the meaning and the “I” who does not try to understand are uniqueness, but the relationship with God to the spirit is not simply that of inventor and machine, but like that of father and son. (Monadology, v. 84) Communion is contradicted as superstition for those without faith and absoluteness for those with faith. Tabula rasa (blank slate) exists in contradiction to eternal truth. However, feeding the poor would be in agreement with both. It is important to pray that the sustenance for the poor and our own sustenance will continue into the future, to our children and to the poor, so that holiness and life will not cease without separation.

He says: We who are privileged to receive the Eucharist as our bread must nevertheless always pray that none of us be permanently cut off and severed from the body of Christ.

Benedict XVI, Pope . Jesus of Nazareth (pp.156-157). The Crown Publishing Group. Kindle 版.

Ⅵ our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us


 Leibniz’s ‘theodicy’ addressed the differences between Protestants and Catholics. For example, he wrote not only about the conflict between Protestants and Catholics, but also about the conflict between Protestants with regard to the above-mentioned ‘bread’. In Japan, Luther is the most famous Protestant, but Friedrich Zwingli (Zwingli), who also opposed Luther, did not accept sacramentalism. He regarded the participation of Jesus Christ in the Lord’s Supper as a mere figurative expression, and in doing so made use of the philosophical principle that the body can only exist in one place at all times. Luther, on the other hand, is more faithful to the literal sense of the Bible, making it real, including supernatural mysteries. In their opinion, they rejected the doctrine of Transsubstantiation (Total Transubstantiation – the transformation of the bread and wine of the sacrament (Seisan) into the flesh and blood of Christ) rather than that arising from the biblical expression and rejected Konsubstantiatio ( consubstantiatio – Christ coexists with the bread and wine) dogma and the bread, and held these things ignorant.

Although it did not require a union of the two, they were not merely logical, but also important in fulfilling Christ’s final wish. Through faith justification, they chose to maintain the everlasting presence of the Messiah’s body. In modern times, the conflict between Catholics and Protestants goes without saying, but even in Catholicism, the desire to hear the Lord’s petition remains the same. The fifth petition of the Lord’s Prayer presupposes a world of indebtedness, i.e. sin. The theme of forgiveness runs through all the Gospels, with the story of the ‘retainer who would not forgive his fellow man’ in Matthew 18. The man, a high-ranking deputy, had begged the king to forgive him a high debt, but shortly afterwards he blackmailed his fellow strangers into forgiving him a small differential debt. His swearing came to the ears of the king, who forgave him from other retainers, and he had his remission revoked. The king is a parable of the divine father, but the story does not end there.

――In chapter 23 of Luke’s Gospel, two other sinners were to be executed besides Jesus at his crucifixion.

One of the sinners cursed Jesus right up to his death, saying, “If you are the Messiah, prove it by saving yourself”. The other sinner, on the other hand, defended Jesus. Despite being in the same situation, he humbly said to Jesus, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom”. Jesus said to such a sinner. ‘“Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise’.

The sinner was loved by Jesus just before his execution. Regarding Leibniz’s principle of indistinguishable = identical, Jesus and the sinner are separate entities, even though they are at the same place of execution. Separate and uncrossing clocks of destiny exist for each, but they are bonded by ‘forgiveness’. Christians say that Jesus came down to earth, the cross, whereas crucifixion is raised high for the sinner to be exposed. We know that two people with different vectors can be bonded ‘on the spot’. Unlike the cursed sinner, it is through ‘forgiveness’ that the bond is achieved. ‘Forgiveness’ is, I believe, the beautiful point of contact between Leibnizian philosophy and Catholic theology. The sinner’s turn towards good is an invisible generative change. The prayer, ‘Forgiving Evil’, is the constant wish for a change to goodness over today’s evil intentions. It contains the ‘we’, the I.

Self-awareness does not come from collectivity. The collective enjoyed executions in a state of spectatorship. Community is not a dysfunctional situation where love and justice are in sync. The ‘justice’ awakened by the sinner just before death is love for Jesus. I hope for a world in which it is pervasive, and I use it as a prayer to inspire me.

If we want to understand the petition fully and make it our own, we must go one step further and ask: What is forgiveness, really? What happens when forgiveness takes place? Guilt is a reality,……For this reason, forgiveness must be more than a matter of ignoring, of merely trying to forget. Guilt must be worked through, healed, and thus overcome. Forgiveness exacts a price—first of all from the person who forgives. Benedict XVI, Pope . Jesus of Nazareth (p.158). The Crown Publishing Group. Kindle 版.

Ⅶ and lead us not into temptation

If we are to use the language of Leibniz’s ‘theodicy’, philosophy has ensured that the meaning of words needs to be developed so that mysteries do not become empty words. Throughout the long history of the world, as long as there are words, they are disproved by inference. Once we are tempted by the theory of probability to pray correctly and find that phenomena are connected to each other, we are driven by the assumption that they are always connected. ‘Temptation’ is a stumbling block for people, including human immorality, but who is the one who tempts and leads? Temptation is certainly the devil, but there is also an interesting passage in Jeremiah 20:7.

Jeremiah20:7 Du hast mich verführt, Herr, und ich habe mich verführen lassen; du hast mich gepackt und mir Gewalt angetan. Nun spotten sie immerzu über mich, alle lachen mich aus. Denn sooft ich in deinem Auftrag rede, muss ich Unrecht anprangern. »Verbrechen!«, muss ich rufen, »Unterdrückung!« Und das bringt mir nichts als Spott und Hohn ein, Tag für Tag.

‘Lord, you have enticed me’, which was repeatedly called out in the film Die grosse Stille (The Great Silence), giving rise to questions. In Japanese it is translated in different words, but in the German version of the country of production it is verführt (enticed) The young Jeremiah was made a prophet by the Lord. But because he was righteous, he was estranged from the people. This is more evident in the German version, Tag für Tag and it is repeated ‘day in and day out’, but the constant cries of injustice, ridicule and scorn disgusted him.

It is easier to live when you do what the masses tell you to do. That is why he lamented what God gave him as ‘temptation’. Benedict XVI used the analogy with Job, but this time I have brought out Jeremiah. It is Christian to say that temptation is the devil, but in reality the devil is more incomprehensible than God.

There is scripture in the deeds of God. Even from a philosophical perspective, despite the contradiction between eternal truth and the psychology of chance, God has a fixed point, but existence with regard to Satan does not exist as eternal truth, only as chance. Simone Weil’s ‘Creation. Good is shattered and scattered to evil” would be exactly that. It means that God’s deeds had an original form and were shattered, but the Satan’s are not. The Bible reading allows people to recognise God as common, but as for Satan, it is a coincidence of each. Light does not solve everything. Because, as in John 1, darkness avoids light without understanding it. Jeremiah was chosen by God, but he shouted because he could no longer bear the malice of the people.

In the New Testament, 1 Corinthians chapter 10 says that God doesn’t give us trials we can’t endure. This is a well-known passage even in the non-religious world, but there is a continuation to this, but we are rarely told the rest of the story. Therefore, it is misunderstood as a ‘never-give-up spirit’.

It is a continuation of this: ‘It provides a way out in times of temptation and enables us to withstand temptation’.

Regarding this item, although Benedict XVI was an excellent commentary on the story of Benedict XVI, I judge that it does not extend to practice if I am honest, including the Catholic clergy issue. Therefore, I will end by adding Simone Weil, which I have adopted in my own way. ‘To love the truth means to hold on to the vacuum and consequently to accept death. It is not difficult to imagine such idealism, although it is unclear whether there is such a thing as immunity to temptation. How can we avoid being misguided by collectivity, like a school of fish, including the mistakes of one individual?

Temptation – from what do we protect ourselves, this is a ‘mystery’ but not a ‘mystery’ to leave behind. Loving the truth, by which the soul is likely to turn to good, but still one sins. Truth is not to be kept alive simply by explaining it. If the path leading to truth is cut off, it is tantamount to death. Philosophical rationality that does not leave mysteries unexplained, that looks to mysteries that cannot be solved, this section is not particularly altruistic, rather it is self-reliant. It is an exhortation to the mind of the self, not to the outside world. ‘Awareness’ is a prayer that must not be turned away from, as in the Leibnizian philosophy, which has made it a ‘reflection’ on oneself.

we pray, “And lead us not into temptation,” we are expressing our awareness “that the enemy can do nothing against us unless God has allowed it beforehand, so that our fear, our devotion and our worship may be directed to God—(p163)

When we pray the sixth petition of the Our Father, we must therefore, on one hand, be ready to take upon ourselves the burden of trials that is meted out to us. On the other hand, the object of the petition is to ask God not to mete out more than we can bear, not to let us slip from his hands. We make this prayer in the trustful certainty that Saint Paul has articulated for us: “God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your strength, but with the temptation will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it” (1 Cor 10:13).

Benedict XVI, Pope . Jesus of Nazareth (p.163.164). The Crown Publishing Group. Kindle 版.

Ⅷ but deliver us from evil.

The last petition of the Our Father takes up the previous one again and gives it a positive twist.

Benedict XVI, Pope . Jesus of Nazareth (p.164). The Crown Publishing Group. Kindle 版.

 Many people may not even understand Leibniz’s monadology in terms of the soul having no windows. The explanation of monadology itself is straightforward but difficult to understand. It is much like the language of prayer. If you read theodicy, you will be exposed to Leibniz’s view of religion and the meaning of the monad will be more profound, but the monadology is disconnected. ‘theodicy’ and other books are only what he calls experience, accidental truths, but he wanted monadology to be an adjunct to eternal truths. I think it was to adapt it to any age, as it applies to today.

The words of the Lord’s Prayer are simple and can be taken verbatim. It contains the basis of modern morality. As for theology, it seems to be decided what evil is meant here. It seems to mean political evil, scepticism and save us from the evil that ensnares Christians. However, it makes sense to me that the words of the prayer itself do not specify the ‘forces of evil’ or the ‘evil one’. In Greek philosophy, faith was equated with doxa (speculation), which was lower than knowledge. Ancient Greek sexual life was unique, and love between men was considered to be the real thing. Women were only child bearers, and even if a woman had both knowledge and beauty, her status was not superior to that of a man. My writing in this way was, in ancient times, ‘evil’. Evil is subject to current trends.

In reality evil is not always as symbolic as the dragon of the Apocalypse. It is important to rationalise for once that Jesus Christ was not falsely executed. That was the law back then, not false accusations. Plants are determined to repeat themselves with regularity in the number of petals and leaves, but no two flowers are the same. The law also has existed since ancient times that one must not commit murder, but it is not exactly the same as it was in ancient times. The words of the prayer also return to the third time with these words: ‘THY KINGDOM COME’. But this is not a simple repetition. We cannot know the words in the Bible or the truths we have learned, even if we scrape them together. But as we learn more and more, we come to know Jeremiah and many other sufferings and absurdities. We must pray that our desire is not more superficial.

Last: Division does not keep simple love alive.

This time, during Benedict XVI’s critical condition, he bought the remaining copy of a three-volume book called Jesus of Nazareth, which contained a commentary on the Lord’s Prayer. While I was reading it, he died on 31 December 2022. My only impression was this. ‘The Bible says that God calls each of us by a name that no one else knows’ (Revelation 2:17), he was quoted as saying, and just as I was reading that passage I came across the news of his death. I started out only wanting to write down my one word impression, “Did God call him a name that a man as wise as he was did not know? :This is the monad that is impossible to know by memory. I only knew him in books, but I liked books. Maybe that is only part of what makes him up, but I am grateful that he left us books. I loved his books. He wrote seven petitions from the Gospel of Matthew. Three are prayers that call out to ‘you’, four are wishes for ‘us’ and the remaining four are wishes about hope, desire and need. 

Having used monadology for simple romance was a consideration due to the unresolved Catholic scandals. Therefore, I could not write the mystery as simply wonderful. There is no fear of criticism from those around me now. Indeed, holiness is truth. However, experience inhibits words of truth when they are ‘hypocritical’. Words distorted by it stink. Just as Benedict XVI himself built a new theology for the harmony of the world’s divisions, so did Leibniz, who saw the corruption and strife in the clergy. What he should have simply looked at God alone, he tried to look at man. What to do with ugly human beings, what to do with precious human beings, what to do with the enigmatic ‘monad’ that neither enhances nor diminishes their value. That act and my current state of mind overlap.

Love simply cannot live in a divided world. It is as easy as possible to say that even injustice is love. Love must live in contradiction with justice. Contradictions, when tamed, are a cradle of stability. Don’t be the kind of person who can sleep peacefully, turning away from those who are suffering in front of you, Leibniz said. ‘We are left with micronised considerations, all the way down to ‘desires’ that we are not even consciously conscious about. ‘Deliver us from evil, that we may always be aware, and that someone in need may be saved.’ Rest to those who are suffering, and may the day when we are released from our burdens, the day when we are called by a name that only God knows, not be a day of sorrow. On that day, may we keep awake to the fact that it is a joyous day.



G.W Leibniz

Monadologie Racle, -German.

Discours de métaphysique.

Versuche in der Theodicée über die Güte Gottes, die Freiheit des Menschen und den Ursprung des Übels: Philosophische Werke Band 4 (Philosophische Bibliothek 499) (German Edition) 

Was das Begreifen anlangt, so pflichte ich ihm  hierin bei, habe aber schon gezeigt, daß die Mysterien eine Entwicklung des Wortsinnes erheischen, um nicht sine mente soni, leere  Worte zu sein: und ich habe auch gezeigt, wie notwendig es ist,  auf Einwürfe antworten zu können, da andernfalls die These verworfen werden müßte.   Er zitiert theologische

. Er zitiert theologische Autoritäten, welche die Unauflöslichkeit der gegen die Mysterien gerichteten Einwände anzuerkennen scheinen. Einer der ersten ist Luther. Ich habe schon im S 12

sowenig wie die Träume. Wir täuschen uns selbst durch den Gebrauch, den wir davon machen, d. h. durch unsere Folgerungen.  Wir lassen uns eben durch Wahrscheinlichkeitsargumente verführen und dadurch werden wir zu der Annahme getrieben, so wie  wir die Phänomene oft miteinander verbunden gefunden haben,  so müßten sie immer verbunden sein. Da nun alles, was keine Ecken  zu haben scheint, für gewöhnlich auch wirklich keine hat, glauben wir leicht, es müßte sich immer so verhalten. Ein solcher Irrtum ist verzeihlich und zuweilen unvermeidlich, wenn wir rasch  handeln und das Wahrscheinlichste wählen müssen; haben wir aber  Muße und Zeit zur Sammlung, so begehen wir einen Fehler, wenn  wir das als sicher hinstellen, was dies gar nicht ist. Die sinnliche  Erscheinung befindet sich also oft mit der Wahrheit im Widerspruch, aber unser Urteilsvermögen niemals, wenn es genau den  Denkgesetzen gemäß gebraucht wird. Versteht man unter Vernunft  ganz allgemein die Fähigkeit, schlecht und recht zu räsonieren, dann  gebe ich zu, sie vermag uns zu täuschen und täuscht uns auch wirklich, und zwar sind die Erscheinungen unseres Verstandes ebenso  oft täuschend wie die der Sinne: aber es handelt sich hier um die  Verkettung der Wahrheiten und um Einwürfe in schulgerechter  Form, und in diesem Sinne kann uns die Vernunft unmöglich täuschen.

Dort spendet Gott Gnade und Erbarmen den Unwürdigen;  hier spendet er Zorn und Strenge denen, die sie nicht verdient haben;  an beiden Stellen zu heftig und unbillig mit Bezug auf die Menschen,  aber gerecht und wahrhaft mit Bezug auf sich selbst.

Denn wie das  gerecht sein soll, daß er Unwürdige krönt, ist jetzt zwar unbegreiflich, aber wir werden es erkennen, wenn wir dorthin kommen, wo  man nicht mehr glauben, sondern das Offenbarte mit eignen Augen  schauen wird. Wie es daher gerecht sein soll, daß er die verdammt,  welche es nicht verdienen, muß solange geglaubt werden, bis es der  Menschensohn uns offenbaren wird.




ライプニッツ カトリックとプロテスタントの対立に対する調和を考えた。

ベネディクト16世 宗教と時代の対立に対する調和を考えた。

モナドロジー:ライプニッツ著 90章構成の断章。ギリシャ語のモナス(単一、一)を語源とする。カトリックとプロテスタントの対立時に生きたライプニッツは、究極の調和や唯一性である「一」を探した。数学的幾何学的な点はそれ自身によって一であるが、抽象的観念的な位置でもある。しかし実在的な位置ではない。それでも実在性をもつ位置は性質をもつ一として、「多」でなければならない。それこそ羊の群れのように。円の中心は点でありながら、無限多の直径を含む。精神はそれ自身でありながら、過去・現在・未来に渡る無限な表象を含む。精神、それは実在的に内在するのではなく、精神は「多」を表現し、表出する。「表現」「表出」の概念こそライプニッツのモナドロジーの重要な概念となる。

  1. はじめに
  2. Ⅰ「天におられる私たちの父よ」
  3. Ⅱみ名が聖とされますように
  4. Ⅲ み国がきますように
  5. Ⅳ あなたのみ旨が行われますように、天において同じように地にも
  6. Ⅴ 私たちの日ごとの(糧)。パンを、今日、私たちにお与えください
  7. Ⅵ 私たちの罪をお許しください。私たちも人を許します
  8. Ⅶ 私たちを誘惑へと導かないでください。
  9. Ⅷ 私たちを悪からお救いください 
  10. 分裂が故に愛の単純化を許さない
  11. 参照





わたしたちの日ごとの糧を今日も お与えください。







――祈りの主体は「私たち」です。神の子たちの「私たち」にいることによってのみ、私たちはこの世の限界を超え、神のもとに高く上がって行くことができるのです。この私たちが、私の心の最も奥深いところを呼び覚ましてくれます。祈りにおいては、まったく個人的な心の内奥と共同体の交わりとが、常に互いに浸透しあわなければなりません――ナザレのイエス ベネディクト16世:P75


神秘を打ち出すことは人間が神秘に近づきすぎることに耐えられないがゆえに、かえって人間の目には、ご自分を見えにくくする事実を神は気になさいませんでした。(希望の扉を開く ヨハネパウロ2世:P62)







私たちの一部に私がいる。私は私たちの中に内在する。 (「私」というのを喪失させるような教えには私は賛同しない。そういう宗教者を私は嫌うし、強く否定する)



―神 の 作用 と 被 造物 の 作用 とを 区別 する ため に、 個体 的 実体( 1) の 概念 が どの よう な もの で ある かを 明らか に する(形而上学叙説・八)述語優位についての記載



単純な実体においては、一つのモナドから他のモナドには観念的な作用しか存在せず、その作用は神の仲介によらなければ効果を持つことはない(モナドロジー 第五十一節)


神は出エジプト記3章14節の「私は、『私は有る』という者だ」と 神が存在を名乗った。十戒の「あなたは神の名を汚してはならない」のモーセの時代には多くの神々がいた。そこで、モーセは、それらの神々に対しこの神の特別の権威を示すために、神にその名を尋ねる。神が名をもつというのは「多神教」の世界の考えである。モーセに語りかけた神も名前を持たなければならなかった。神は、神々の一人であるかのように、名前を持って神々の世界に入っていくことができなかった。「私は『私は有る』という者だ」と答えた神は、モーセの問いの同意と同時に拒否を表している。従ってJHWHで示される神の名はイスラエルにおいて発音されてはならないということは、全く正しいとする。神の名前は神々の名の一つに格下げされてはならない。神の判断は名前とは何かという疑問を残す。名前は呼びかけることを可能にするが、本性を示すわけではない。アダムが動物に名前をつけたことは動物たちを呼ぶためである。神は人間に呼ばれることも可能となり、そして傷つけられることを受け入れられた。それによって祈りの言葉の「み名が聖とされますように」ということが何の意味をされていのか、明確になっていく。


私たちにとっては常に心からの良心の糾明でもあるのです。私は神の名なる名をどのように扱っただろうか……神が私たちとともにおられるという神秘を神の名を穢す機会とすることなく、かえってその神秘によって神の純粋さと聖性の中に高められるよう、私は充分に心を配っただろうか。(ナザレのイエス ベネディクト16世:p.194)

Ⅲ み国がきますように



魂は記憶によって、一種の繋がりを求める働きが与えられている。この働きは理性に似ているが、理性と区別されるものである。それは動物において見られるとおりであるが、例えば棒で打たれた犬が次は逃げ出すが(モナドロジー・二十六)人間は神の仕打ちであったとしても残ることがある。ヨブやエレミアのように。 人間には矛盾を含み、因果関係のみでは選択しない。目の前の光景が穏やかであっても、知らないところで戦争があり不幸がある。あるいは自分自身が不幸なのかもしれない。天の国のように満たされること、そのために正義を通すと誓うこと。眠っている間に目覚めたら世界が天の国だったことを祈ることはない。日々、義を選べること。それを唱える。こういった唯一のものとの合致、それが叶わないが故の合致への希望、理性的言語の裏の衝動、神秘を求める力はその矛盾の中に内包されるが、それは純粋だと思う(同・四十九~六十二参考)

キリストとの出会いによってこの願いはさらに深められ、具体的なものとなります。……聞き分ける心を願うことは、こうしてイエス・キリストとの交わりを願う祈り、キリストにおいて「一つの者」(ガラ3:28)となることを願う祈りとなる。そえは真のキリストの倣びを願う祈りであり、私たちをキリストと一つのからだとする祈りです。(ナザレのイエス ベネディクト16世 p.196)

Ⅳ あなたのみ旨が行われますように、天において同じように地にも

この願いの言葉から二つのことが直接明らかとなります。私たちにとっての、そして私たちのための神の意志、私たちの存在と意志の尺度となるべき神の意志があります。(ナザレのイエス ベネディクト16世 P.197)



私たちの意志の重力は、常に私たちを神の意志から引きはがし、私たちを単なる「地」にしてしまうのです。しかし、イエスは私たちを受け容れ、私たちはイエスとの交わりの中において神の意志を知るのです。(ナザレのイエス ベネディクト16世 p200)

Ⅴ 私たちの日ごとの(糧)。パンを、今日、私たちにお与えください



まずそれが第一条件だということを念頭に置いたうえで敢えて理由律の欠如を語るとするのなら、「ビュリダンのロバ」(Buridan’s ass)の説明から入る。ロバのビュリダンは大好物の藁の束を見つける。しかし、ビュリダンは後ろを振り返って、もう一つの藁の束も気になってしまった。そのロバは賢くてどちらの藁を食べるのか悩んでしまった。そうしてビュリダンは飢え死にしてしまった。賢く理性的が故に、飢え死にという愚かな結果を招いてしまう、このことは哲学的考察、ドクサでパンを見つめても無意味なことと酷似している。このビュリダンはフランス語の哲学者だそうだが、出典の根拠がない資料であるが、ライプニッツは「弁神論」のたとえ話で出している。



聖体への秘跡は特別の意味で「私たちの」、イエス・キリストの弟子たちのパンなのです。(ナザレのイエス ベネディクト16世 p207)

Ⅵ 私たちの罪をお許しください。私たちも人を許します




ルカによる福音書の23章、イエスの磔刑でイエスの他に罪人が他に二人処刑されることになっていた。 罪人のうちの一人は死ぬ直前までイエスに「お前がメシアなら自分自身を救ってみろ」と罵った。それに対してもう一人の罪人はそんなイエスを庇った。死を目前とした同じ境遇でありながらイエスに対して「貴方の御国においでになるときには、私を思い出してください」と謙虚な気持ちで接した。イエスは、そんな罪人に対してこういった。「あなたは今日、わたしと一緒に楽園にいる」と――この罪人は死する直前でイエスに辿り着いている。ライプニッツの「区別不可能=同一の原理」について、イエスと罪人は同じ処刑場にいながら別々の存在である。それぞれの運命の時計は別々に交わることなく存在していが、「赦し」によって絆を持った。キリスト教では、イエスは十字架に降りてこられたと言うが、磔刑とは罪人が吊るしあげられることである。ベクトルの違う二人が「その場限り」の絆を持つことを知る。罵った罪人と違ってそれは「赦し」によって絆は実現している。「赦し」こそライプニッツ哲学とカトリック神学の美しい接点であると私は思っている。罪人が、善へと向かった事は目に見えない生成変化である。祈りの言葉である「悪を許すこと」今日の悪意に対する善意への変化を常に願うことである。それは「私たち」であり、私であることを込められている。気づきとは集団性では生まれない。集団は処刑を野次馬状態で楽しんだ。共同体とは愛も正義も履き違えている機能停止ではない。死の直前で罪人が目覚めた「正義」こそイエスへの愛である。それが行き届いている世界を望むとともに、自分を奮い立たせる祈りの言葉としている。

「父よ、どうぞ彼等を赦してやってください。彼等は自分が何をしているのかを知らないのですから」(ルカ23:34)イエスのこの願いを私達が完全に理解し、自分のものにしたいと思うのならば、私達はもう一歩進んで、赦しとは一体何なのかということを問わなければなりません。そこで行われることは何であるのか。罪とは一つの現実です。……赦しは無視すること以上のものでなければなりません。単に忘れるということ以上のものでなければなりません。(ナザレのイエス ベネディクト16世 P.209)

Ⅶ 私たちを誘惑へと導かないでください。


「誘惑」とは人間の不道徳なことも含めて躓きであるが、誘惑と導く者とは誰のことなのか。 誘惑とは悪魔のことであるが、エレミア書の20章7節にも興味深い一節がある。

エレミヤ書20:7(ドイツ語)Du hast mich verführt, Herr, und ich habe mich verführen lassen; du hast mich gepackt und mir Gewalt angetan. Nun spotten sie immerzu über mich, alle lachen mich aus. Denn sooft ich in deinem Auftrag rede, muss ich Unrecht anprangern. »Verbrechen!«, muss ich rufen, »Unterdrückung!« Und das bringt mir nichts als Spott und Hohn ein, Tag für Tag.

「主よ、あなたが私を誘惑した」というところだが、これは映画「大いなる沈黙」(Die grosse Stille)で何度も連呼され疑問を招いた箇所である。日本語では別の言葉で翻訳されているが、制作国のドイツ語版ではverführtと誘惑となっている。若きエレミアは主から預言者とされた。しかし、彼は正しいがゆえに人々から疎まれた。ドイツ語版ではそれがより顕著に表れている。Tag für Tagと、それは「毎日毎日」と繰り返しているが、不正と叫び続け嘲笑と軽蔑され続け、彼はうんざりした。



新約聖書の1コリント10章では「神は耐えられないような試練を与えない 」とある。これは無宗教でも有名な箇所ではあるが、これには続きがあるがこの続きを聞かされることが少ないので根性論とされ良い意味を持たないことが多い。




「私達を誘惑へと導かないでください」という願いは、「前もって敵(サタン)に何かが許されているのでないのなら、敵は私たちに向かって何も悪いことをすることはできない」という認識を表現しているのです……主の祈りの第六の願いを祈る時、一方では、私達に見合った試練の重荷を引き受ける用意がなくてはなりません。……聖パウロの言葉に従って、信頼と確信のうちにこの願いを口にすることができます。「神は真実な方です。あなた方が耐えられないような試練にあわせることはなさいません。誘惑の時には逃げ道を用意し、誘惑に耐えることができるようにしてくださいます」(1コリント10:13)(ナザレのイエス ベネディクト16世:p215,p216,217)

Ⅷ 私たちを悪からお救いください 

主の祈りの最後の願いはその前の願いをもう一度取り上げ、それを積極的な願いに変えます。(ナザレのイエス ベネディクト16世:p217)



現実の悪とは黙示録の竜のように象徴的とは限らない。イエスキリストは冤罪で処刑されたわけではないと一回は理性を持つことが重要である。冤罪ではなく当時ではそういう法律だったのだ。植物は花弁の枚数や葉の枚数の規則性を持って繰り返すことが決まっているが、同じ花は咲かない。法律も殺人を犯してはならないとは古代から存在する法律だが、古代と全く同じではない。祈りの言葉もこの言葉で三回目の「み国がきますように」に戻る。しかし、これは単純な繰り返しではない。聖書に記された言葉や知った真理をかき集めても私達は実体は知りえない。しかし、学びが増えていく間にエレミアを始め色んな苦しみや不条理を 知っていく。私達の願いがより一層表面的なものに留まらないように祈らなければならない。








G.W Leibniz

Monadologie Racle, -German.

Discours de métaphysique.

Versuche in der Theodicée über die Güte Gottes, die Freiheit des Menschen und den Ursprung des Übels: Philosophische Werke Band 4 (Philosophische Bibliothek 499) (German Edition) 

Was das Begreifen anlangt, so pflichte ich ihm  hierin bei, habe aber schon gezeigt, daß die Mysterien eine Entwicklung des Wortsinnes erheischen, um nicht sine mente soni, leere  Worte zu sein: und ich habe auch gezeigt, wie notwendig es ist,  auf Einwürfe antworten zu können, da andernfalls die These verworfen werden müßte.   Er zitiert theologische

. Er zitiert theologische Autoritäten, welche die Unauflöslichkeit der gegen die Mysterien gerichteten Einwände anzuerkennen scheinen. Einer der ersten ist Luther. Ich habe schon im S 12

sowenig wie die Träume. Wir täuschen uns selbst durch den Gebrauch, den wir davon machen, d. h. durch unsere Folgerungen.  Wir lassen uns eben durch Wahrscheinlichkeitsargumente verführen und dadurch werden wir zu der Annahme getrieben, so wie  wir die Phänomene oft miteinander verbunden gefunden haben,  so müßten sie immer verbunden sein. Da nun alles, was keine Ecken  zu haben scheint, für gewöhnlich auch wirklich keine hat, glauben wir leicht, es müßte sich immer so verhalten. Ein solcher Irrtum ist verzeihlich und zuweilen unvermeidlich, wenn wir rasch  handeln und das Wahrscheinlichste wählen müssen; haben wir aber  Muße und Zeit zur Sammlung, so begehen wir einen Fehler, wenn  wir das als sicher hinstellen, was dies gar nicht ist. Die sinnliche  Erscheinung befindet sich also oft mit der Wahrheit im Widerspruch, aber unser Urteilsvermögen niemals, wenn es genau den  Denkgesetzen gemäß gebraucht wird. Versteht man unter Vernunft  ganz allgemein die Fähigkeit, schlecht und recht zu räsonieren, dann  gebe ich zu, sie vermag uns zu täuschen und täuscht uns auch wirklich, und zwar sind die Erscheinungen unseres Verstandes ebenso  oft täuschend wie die der Sinne: aber es handelt sich hier um die  Verkettung der Wahrheiten und um Einwürfe in schulgerechter  Form, und in diesem Sinne kann uns die Vernunft unmöglich täuschen.

Dort spendet Gott Gnade und Erbarmen den Unwürdigen;  hier spendet er Zorn und Strenge denen, die sie nicht verdient haben;  an beiden Stellen zu heftig und unbillig mit Bezug auf die Menschen,  aber gerecht und wahrhaft mit Bezug auf sich selbst.

Denn wie das  gerecht sein soll, daß er Unwürdige krönt, ist jetzt zwar unbegreiflich, aber wir werden es erkennen, wenn wir dorthin kommen, wo  man nicht mehr glauben, sondern das Offenbarte mit eignen Augen  schauen wird. Wie es daher gerecht sein soll, daß er die verdammt,  welche es nicht verdienen, muß solange geglaubt werden, bis es der  Menschensohn uns offenbaren wird.

Sacred and Secular phenomenology.

Why is it beautiful?
While I keep on chasing it,
My heart knows better than I do. Where to go for it.

A Sacred and B Secular. Chris Kyogetu
  1. 1Artwork with a phenomenological gaze.
  2. 2The Death of the Author
  3. 3Sacred and Secular Phenomenology
  4. Last ständig vorangent

1Artwork with a phenomenological gaze.

Have you ever thought about sketching a building on a street you pass every day, just once? It is a building you should see every day. You may be able to describe the features of the building, but you cannot spontaneously say how many windows it has. If you were to draw it, you would start by counting them.

It is difficult to find a place for sensitivity to live. Sensitivity cannot be used as a simple form of communication: living in the 20th-21st century, we are exposed to works of ‘expressionism’ and ‘artistic supremacy’, we are taught that we have ‘freedom’ (freedom by breaking away from religion) in our hands. We will see famous works of art as if they had been chosen by the freedom and good will of man.

But on the contrary, many questions will arise in front of the painting as to why a single painting is so expensive. Few people can explain why this one painting is worth so much, and its magical survival strategy as a business strategy. Apart from the fact that the Church commissioned the painting, there are many lies about how the demand for it was created. We accept the world vaguely, without subdividing it, like a building that does not know how many windows it has, but always exists.

A building has a role to play. But when I, as an outsider, try to sketch it, when I try to mix the external time of the building with the mental image of the building, when I start to count the windows, I have an inner world of my own.

When religions chose paintings, the criteria were simple. All that had to be painted was a saint, even if there was no understanding on the part of the church. Once people were painted, the subjects became endless. It is not known how many people have synaesthesia, so why are they chosen? How can one person’s ‘dream’ cost hundreds of millions of dollars? Some people can choose one or the other: manifestation through recognition by others, or manifestation of a value that only they know. Some people cannot choose. I am one who could not choose. The reason is that it is not as simple as the dichotomy between the sacred and the secular.

That is why we can no longer distinguish between them and the ‘sacred’. That is why the first thing to be baptised, as a sublimation from sensitivity to sensibility, is to learn ‘interdit’ in the body. 

A misunderstanding of Bataille’s ‘transgression’ by many irreligious people is that they assume that transgression into prohibition is the abolition or removal of the ‘sacred’, thereby confusing it with evolution – freedom. (Erotisme coll 10/18, p. 68,69) 

The eroticism of Bataille and Baudelaire, the fetishism of Roland Barthes, are not new discoveries. They were philosophies of the original state of nature that broke taboos. They understood Catholic sanctity and were oppressed by it, but did not seek to abolish it. We must not think of them only and by the authority of religion.

Interdit is the French word for Catholic prohibition…Because Bataille is French.

The Death of the Author

There are differences between the production processes of spherical-joint dolls and statues of the Virgin Mary. The statue of the Virgin Mary is dug out of a regular rectangle and does not show her nakedness (the skeleton and the flesh are conscious at the sculpting stage), but the spherically articulated doll is made out of material and is conscious of its nakedness.By associating the exposed genitals with the naked body and the mutilated corpse, it is even more related to the sexuality and death of the Battle philosophy.What is the entity confronting the spherically articulated doll? The answer is saints. Remember that St Bernadette is beautifully preserved as a mummy. She became not only a corpse, but a transcendent being, but does the doll qualify?

  At the intersection of the sacred and the profane in an A∩ B relationship lies the sacred part of art-humanity. Art in the Christian world is often like this. In literature, even in ‘Undine’, a Catholic priest creates the necessary conditions for the water nymph to become human.

But she dies because of human folly. What was the most beautiful thing in this story? It was the ‘love’ of the water nymph, who tried to approach the ‘human image’ defined by priests and Christian values. The tragedy of Undine having to kill the man who broke the contract is more love. Again, we can speak of a Bataillean transgression and interdit.

St Bernadette
Friedrich de la Motte Fouqué:Undine 
by Arthur Rackham

Hans Bellmeer’s doll is said to have left traces of secrets. It has a spherical belly, an artificial daughter, and it does not tell the story of its life. Dolls were toys, but this doll plays with the human psyche. Abstract works are often not judged by visual information alone and require a thesis from the painter, as in the case of Malevich. Nevertheless, what is always required is a work of sensitivity towards the reader or viewer. Whatever the author’s background, he or she emerges as a signifier. This is exactly what can be said of Roland Barthes’s ‘The Death of the Author’: the work and the author are two different ‘Ones’, and the work is not a manifestation of the author. However, an intuitive (synaesthetic) viewer may find fragments of the author. It is impossible to say when the effect of the symbols will be felt after a long period of time, but the role of symbolisation is to give form to ‘pain’ which is often overlooked in the world of war, racial oppression, ideas and writing.

One of the things that has left a painful legacy is the cross-holes left in the Auschwitz camps, but it is impossible for us to experience the same pain. So is a place like Auschwitz enough to document the ‘tragedy’? War cannot be documented in many other ways. In times of catastrophe, we revisit the catastrophic past. But puppets can be applied to war and other contemporary tragedies. Artworks are prepared to be applied to many different positions.

In a sketch, the external value of existence is like counting the number of windows. You don’t need to know the number to have everyday problems. But when you start counting, it shows your humanity.

…… For example, you are a teacher. When you ask your students to draw, they all draw different pictures.

Is this pure work the same as an unjust or immoral mind? Unfortunately, as human functions, they are the same. If we were to assign superiority or inferiority to them, it would depend on the moral ethics of the time. As proof of this, we remember that Gauguin’s paintings were treated as pornography in modern times.

3Sacred and Secular Phenomenology

What should be Epoché (phenomenological suspension) regarding the sacred and the profane is ‘happiness’. Today, happiness is divided into happiness that can be communicated to others and happiness as the value of one’s own existence. People always live in search of happiness and do not want their happiness to be violated. If they are uncomfortable with religious talk, it is because their own sense of the value of happiness is shaken. Therefore, you must suspend the urge to be happy. Phenomena are not driven solely by happiness. We must recognise that reality. Are you under the impression that works of art make you happy? Well, that is a mistake to begin with. One’s own sense of happiness interferes with the perception of the sacred. This is also true for religious people, whose awareness of true happiness can become a word unto itself and lead to unaccountable injustice.

It is not to denigrate faith that phenomenology is concerned with phenomena. Religion has also become an obstacle for those who associate philosophy with happiness, but that is exactly what must be done to Epoché. It is tantamount to not even understanding actual existence. For they have stopped thinking about where in the world they have been dropped by the values of happiness: ‘I could be happy with philosophy without religion.’ Today, just as the poet Baudelaire defined God and the secular not as a dualism but as a vertically equal position from the human point of view, I see the relationship between the sacred and the secular not as a dualism but as a set theory, like A∩B. As a world event, the sacred does not ‘attachment’ but ‘includes’.

Oscar Wilde’s Salome example will be the last. John the Baptist, who was executed, was located at A-B. Oscar Wilde was an adaptation of the Bible but understood it well. Had he not attempted to convert to Catholicism, he would not have turned his attention to this ‘Interdit’.(prohibition)

Oscar Wilde’s Salome is not a simple indulgence. If he had chosen to tell an unregulated story, using only his imagination, he could have come up with an ending in which Jokanaan was not executed and Salome was not killed. He was well versed in freedom and law (Interdit) as to why Salome had to be killed. The evidence for this is that Oscar Wilde converted to Catholicism in his later years.

Jesus Christ crossed over to the people with his own feet, but Joan the Baptist (Jokanaan) obstinately refused to forgive King Herod’s unfaithfulness. In the Bible, Salome’s original book, John appeared to testify to the light (Gospel according to John, chapter 1) and to say that Jesus was the Son of God. John the Baptist was so righteous that he even advised against religious leaders. (Matthew 3:7-12)

I don’t know why Wilde understood this, however, it was biblically correct for him not to answer Salome’s love. Jesus can move from justice to love. It also makes sense to explain the Holy Spirit’s involvement in the events of this world that the Trinity has its own persona and that the Holy Spirit comes and goes.

Oscar Wilde: ‘Salome’.
Painting by Aubrey Beardsley.

The creator of a work of art dies, but we make a mistake if we see this death as just ‘death’. We must not forget that this ‘death’ is typical of Jesus. John the Baptist did not come back to life, Lazarus was a reanimation. Nor did Jesus’ resurrection give him another life, as in reincarnation. Even Mary, weeping at the tomb, did not recognise Jesus after the resurrection. Hans Bellmeer and other writers have also not been analysed and resurrected. They have only assumed their Creator, whom we have analysed from their writings and works.

It is banal for the transformation of the artist to be an observation only in the museum (and books). If it is to be a phenomenological reduction, it is to try to make the transformation everyday. Phenomenology is the philosophy of the everyday.

Last ständig vorangent

Jesus Christ, the number corresponding to the Hebrew letters, adds up to (Jesus 888 + Christ 1480 = 2368) These three together are a golden ratio of 3:5:8, but the Hans Bellmer doll is not St Bernadette, but the woman who modelled it lived while hiding the fact that she was a Jew There was a woman.

The golden section is already calculated and present before we recognise it. What you do for others, you will do for yourself, is the golden ratio in modern biblical interpretation (Matthew: 7, Luke: 6). What you do for others will come back to you, so much so that it’s even been written about in business books, and we don’t need the noun Christian to hold this idea in our hands. It is an undeniable fact that events are not driven by happiness alone, but if you are looking for happiness yourself, it is a wonder that you are attracted to ‘work’, even if you do not know the Golden Rule. People pray to the miracle of the saint, to the presence of Bernadette, but not to this doll that represents pain. What it imitates is the love of the artist. Because of love, there was anger in the world. And it represented the liberation of the soul. That is the meaning of free creation.

If you begin to look at the mystery of being, why you ‘exist’, rather than the glory of being recognised in life, you will experience communion with the sacred and the profane. Jesus Christ found the pain and sickness of the people. For this age, these were things that the world had rejected. Is there a difference between this act and the reflections and mere observations of philosophy?

Like Jesus, who was aware of his poor existence. It’s banal that a life ends just before someone’s authority is spread throughout the world. During the war, when it was common to see corpses lying around, there were artists who made dolls of the women they loved. Waiting for the war to end is the time of the mundane. The passage of time makes cities without the scars of war. It is a sacred time to look at the reality that hides the pain so that there is no pain, and to look at what is hidden.

In the original title of this article, ‘Sacred and Secular’, M. Eliade says that sacred time is time that can be repeated many times. The two types of time experienced by religious people and the phenomenological time scale are very similar. Chronos (outer time) or Kairos (inner time). Inner time has its own time axis. When the sacred and the religious (sacramental) come close together, it is a different story because it requires ‘faith’. Consciousness is at the door of faith. When we are in front of it this time, we are happy. Belief and faith are two different things, I will not go any further.

Faith and susceptibility are closely connected. It has euphoria and tragedy, as if it were a soul. To be a creator and to want to ‘manifest’, whether this is a mere performance of the brain or a gift from God, becomes from here an inseparable belief in philosophy, but I wish to be given new ‘eyes’ on the ‘happiness’ that I have kept hidden until now.

This article is a series of articles. It and a recounting of Salome and Undine, which I dealt with in my book Iconograph.
The Phenomenology of the Bird’s Nest, which is also my theme.
I drew inspiration from Simone Weil’s philosophy lectures, On Between Instinct and Function.

Birds form nests out of parts of their lives.
Is it the Word of God, as in Matthew 13, or inorganic parts?



Aを聖、Bを俗とする Chris Kyogetu

  1. 1 芸術と聖なるもの
  2. 2 芸術作品と作者の死
  3. 3 聖と俗の現象学
  4.  4 ständig vorangent(絶えず先立っていること)

1 芸術と聖なるもの





だからこそ区別できなくなったのが「神聖」である。「神聖」への一歩として感受性から感性への昇華としてまず洗礼を受けるべきこと、それが「禁止」を身体で覚えることである。バタイユの「禁止」について、多くの無宗教者が誤解をするのは、禁止への侵犯のことを「神聖」の廃止や取り除くことだと思い込み、それによって進化‐自由だと勘違いしていることである。(Erostisme coll P68,69)


2 芸術作品と作者の死


ウンディーネ 画アーサー・ラッカム







3 聖と俗の現象学








 4 ständig vorangent(絶えず先立っていること)










文学と私刑 飛翔点(2)


Clergy Misconduct and Loss of Status‐amissio status clericalis

In fact, when one considers the nature of these offences, apart from the penalty imposed as a result of objective unfitness for the performance of his pastoral duties has arisen."
--Article 1335 of the Church Code The conditions for finding 'good cause' are extinguished.

Clergy Misconduct and Loss of Status.

  1. 1 Justice and Faith
  2. 2Clergy Misconduct and Loss of Status
  3. 3 Love and Justice
  4. 4Last

1 Justice and Faith

Hannah Arendt was famous for saying the following. The greatest evil in the world is the evil done by the most ordinary people. And it is the masses who have stopped thinking about it.

She was speaking about the ‘banality of evil’ when she made this remark on the radio shortly before her death about ‘justice and faith’. On faith, she told a rabbi who had looked after her as a child that she had “lost faith”. Hannah Arendt’s parents were not religious. Nevertheless, Hannah had a childhood in which she attended synagogue and Christian Sunday school. Her interest in religion was complex. When the rabbi heard her confession, he was reasonable and did not accuse Hannah. Instead, he asked. “But who asks you to believe? The rest of the story is unfortunately not recorded.

Twentieth-century philosophy held that justice and faith could not be reconciled. The philosopher Lévinas, celebrated by Pope John Paul II, also argued that ‘deeds are more important than faith’ and was more wary of the ‘pursuit of happiness’ than of seeking justice for all. In practice, philosophy has failed to develop from an abstract concept of ‘justice’, which is necessary material for considering the nature of law as a philosophy of law. It is undeniable that ‘religion’ has become an outdated burden in the eyes of philosophy in the present day.

But if philosophy and literature are to survive, religion is inevitable. As long as there is history in science, such as world history, it is up to the individual to decide how much to know and whether to believe in it.

Also, modern psychology has made analytical psychology, such as the ‘unconscious’, obsolete, and has emphasised cognitive psychology. This has led to a neglect of the ‘soul’, which is a challenge; religion and the soul are also items to be considered in other countries when considering quality of life, but there is still a gap between the two.

Why is it that when we are in a difficult situation, the only recourse we have is self-serving violence, such as ‘mob justice’? As I said last time, Mob Justice is the desire for recognition of the oppressed and erased soul.(link) Such a choice is left to the past, where history has remained in the pursuit of happiness, the ‘greatest happiness of the greatest number’. I am suggesting that utilitarianism has become too dominant. As can be seen when we list the shortcomings of utilitarianism, “sometimes an answer that goes against human intuition and common sense is the right one”. I believe this is the case, for example, with the inequality suffered by the victims of religion.

Here’s the main part: Few Japanese know Canon Law. (The same goes for me.) In Japan, it is considered best to join a religion and leave if dissatisfied. Medical institutions also have few psychologists who are familiar with religion, and religion is not considered very important in the formation of the mind. The difficulties faced by Japanese religious believers are immense. We do not know what to do when we encounter absurdities. This is noticed when the Protective Presence does not work.

2Clergy Misconduct and Loss of Status

And ordination is not a privileged or honorary position, but a service to the people, and if you cannot adapt and live as a clergyman, you should get out of this position and at least try to live a decent life as a believer, which is good for the Church and sufficient for the salvation of the individual.

Fr.Noboru Tanaka  ” Clergy Misconduct and Loss of Status.”

This article is written by Father Noboru Tanaka.

Commentary on Church Law. It is titled ” Clergy Misconduct and Loss of Status.”

(amissio status clericalis)(Japanese)


Non-functional entitiesーーThe reality that one of them is a ‘priest’ and a ‘clergyman’ is a book that anyone who wants to know should pick up. Fr Noboru Tanaka was ordained in 2010, received his bachelor’s degree in theology from the Pontifical Urban University in 2011, and currently teaches ecclesiastical law as a deputy attorney general at the Tokyo District Church Court. I decided to include this book in my pages because it is not as well known as it might be on the left and because I was told by Father himself that the book was not welcomed by the Church Constitution.

The Church deals with criminal and civil cases under Church law. There is a different route for the Church to take, with priests as lay people and the congregation going to the police or lawyers for advice, and the Church also has canon law and church courts. And the information that needs to be given to the public perception is that Catholic clergy are inherently subject to separation from office for breaking their ordination vows. Father Tanaka’s book didn’t contain any defence of his fellow clergy.

First of all, we need to recognise ‘justice’, which is overlooked by the fact that the first law is ‘love’. (John13) In particular, what I didn’t know until I read this book was Clergy Misconduct and Loss of Status, starting with the fact that when I translated that title into English, I wasn’t sure how to translate it into English, but my previous perception was that I was looking for a word that corresponded to ‘clergy dismissal’ to see if I could make it a little more conciliatory. I found on page 134 a reference to the loss of clerical status. (Articles 290-293 of the Canons) Originally called ‘reduction to lay status’ in the old Canons, it is rephrased in the new Canons as ‘loss of status’.

Sacred ranks are manifestations of a sacramental state of an ontological nature. The clergy, who are given the capacity to work in the rank of Christ (art. 1008 of the Code of Canon Law), imprint on the soul an ineradicable sign in the same way as baptism and the profession of faith. Once validly conferred, the sacrament of Holy Orders cannot be extinguished or revoked, but it can be forfeited. The defrocking of a cleric who has committed a serious offence or an unlawful act is a penalty of life imprisonment, as provided for in article 1336 of the Code of Canon Law. There are other laws for the defrocking of clerics who are subject to separation in this way.

3 Love and Justice

In Grace of God, a film about a French Catholic sex abuse trial, the accused priests also asked for ‘tolerance’ and ‘forgiveness’. For the group, over a long period of time, the many “prejudices of normality” have blunted their judgement and corrupted them into an “emotional country”. 〈⇔constitutional country〉

Indeed, Catholicism is a large institution, and for the faithful, who often know more about the priest’s humanity than the victims, the damage is hard to believe because ‘that priest was a good man’. Even more so if he was charismatic, as the accused priest in this film was. Only those who have fallen into the ditch of the world know the silent cry. It is a blind spot that makes people unhappy.

Father Tanaka gave me a new turning point. Originally, love and justice were abstract concepts, but some of their qualities are opposite. Love does not seek arguments, but justice seeks arguments to judge the authorities.

Jesus is ‘love’, but did he really have nothing to say about justice? It may be necessary to re-read the Bible with fresh eyes. Why is ‘justice’ difficult because it is a ‘social practice’? One person cannot do anything alone, that is ‘justice’. The true motivation is ‘love’. What distorts love as a conclusion is self-deception.

According to canon law, it is possible to punish and even defrock priests who break their ordination vows, by decree of the Pope. However, the reality of the current situation is that the abuse and concealment of ‘forgiveness’ is rampant. Forgiveness of the sins of the soul for things like sexual offences is not the same as absolution for crimes.

When people weigh ‘justice’ and ‘love’, they take total happiness as ‘good’, reject arguments for justice and flee to love. Without apology, consolation is itself a lie, and it is a deception even in the language of daily prayer. This is true not only in the Church, but also in contemporary thought. Whether it is the responsibility of the individual or the functioning of society, the answer to this question is that it has not been put into social practice. This has led to consequentialism and has had to promote violence. We need to rethink the social practice of justice today (after the assassination of former Prime Minister Abe), which has become a dichotomy between love (empathy) and violence, rather than love and justice. The clergy must also remember that the world will not be convinced by the cleanliness that has escaped the particular judgement.

Fr. Tanaka says this at the end of the book, quoting from the Gospel of John 8:32 (only the truth will set you free). It is a gift of the Holy Spirit, given to us by the Lord so that we can always walk towards Him. Therefore, let us not despise these gifts by not listening to the voice of the Lord and acting according to our own will, but let us be awake to hear God speak to us, even to the great apostles and saints of old. Let us try to learn from the turns

  The gift is the parable of the talents, which begins in Matthew 25:14. A talant is a currency, and it is said that one talant lasts a lifetime. Many Japanese are offended by this story when they think of it as a mere coin. They get angry that the only condition for a person to go to the Kingdom of Heaven is to earn money. For example, in Takehiko Fukunaga’s Flower of Grass, there is a story in which the church is said to be a money-maker. In addition, Jesus uses violent language to take away the cowards who fail to multiply in the end. This story requires God-given spontaneity, not external value. Just as in Nabokov’s novel, The Gift, he considers his poetic talent to be a gift, so the Christian means to increase the same given talent as ‘riches in heaven’.

I like to use this story, but for a long time there was one thing I could not understand. Why did Jesus say “gnashing of teeth” to a man who was only a coward, and who could see through the nature of his opponent? The same could be said of a clergyman who is in breach and yet has temporary stability. Outwardly humble, but inwardly very ugly.

For whoever has will be given more, and they will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what they have will be taken from them.

And throw that worthless servant outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Matthew 25:29‐30

Those who are registered in the ministry by self-deception, without admitting their sins and voluntarily retiring, cannot go to the Kingdom of Heaven.

Charity thus demands that the Church’s pastors resort to the penal system whenever it is required, keeping in mind the three aims that make it necessary in the ecclesial community: the restoration of the demands of justice, the correction of the guilty party and the repair of scandals.



“Tend the flock of God that is your charge, not by constraint but willingly, as God would have you” (cf. 1 Pet 5:2). 

A baptised person is considered to have an ‘apostolate of the faithful’. Spreading the Gospel in society is a ‘vocation’ in the broadest sense, but in the case of modern Catholicism the laity are less active missionaries. Therefore, we too live the Gospel and our souls are in it. That is why we must not be suppressed.

There are many people who say that although Catholics are not classified as a cult under the Japanese penal code, in non-religious countries Catholics are the same as ‘cults’ because they do not dismiss criminal priests. In their opinion, the faithful cannot say otherwise. Because justice is not lived. A clergyman who can only live by exploiting the goodwill of others and deceiving the love of God is sick. For the sake of self-preservation, the priest sometimes becomes Satan. And he attacks the weakest congregations the hardest.

For example, I was told.

You bitch who cannot forgive others.

Why are they attacking my vital points?

These words robbed me of my faith and my self-esteem. My weakness was my ‘faith’.

It is the believers who are criticised for being crazy about faith, where faith becomes a weakness. To exchange a good argument for a bad one is sophistry.

We do not want to see any more of this kind of damage. We are grateful for the meeting and dialogue with Father Tanaka, who does not turn away from the present situation and who seeks justice.





  1. 1 正義と信仰
  2. 2 聖職者の違法行為と身分の喪失
  3. 3愛と正義
  4. 4 最後に

1 正義と信仰






2 聖職者の違法行為と身分の喪失










田中神父様は私に新しい転機を与えてくれた。元より愛と正義は抽象概念だが性質が正反対を向いているものがある。愛は論拠を求めないが、正義は局所を裁くために論拠を求める。イエスは「愛」であるが、正義について本当に何も語らなかったのか? 再度与えられた目で聖書を読み直す必要もあるだろう。何故、「正義」は困難なのか、それは「社会的実践」だからである。一人では何もできないのが「正義」である。そのための動機は「愛」であることが、真であると思う。愛を結論としようと歪めるものは自己欺瞞である。








タラントンとは通貨のことで、1タラントンで一生分生活できる金額だと言われている。 これを貧しい硬貨1枚で考えると、この話を怒る日本人が多い。天の国に行ける人は能力があって稼いだ人間だけだと、福永武彦の「草の花」でも教会がお金儲けのことしか考えていないと言い出す話がある。更に、イエスは最後に増やせなかった臆病者から乱暴な言葉で奪い取る。この話は、外的な価値ではなく神が与えた自発性を要するものである。ナボコフの小説「賜物」は自分の詩の才能を賜物と信じるというように、キリスト教では「天に富みを積む」ように与えられた才能を増やせという意味である。






罪を認めて自主的に退職せずに、自己欺瞞で聖職に座っている人は天の国に行けない。 私はそう確信する。


教皇フランシスコ パシーテ・グレジェム・デイ

4 最後に















田中昇神父様連載のnote 「ミサを味わう」

愛と正義 ポールリクール(参照)




Le vierge, le vivace et le bel aujourd’hui
Va-t-il nous déchirer avec un coup d’aile ivre
Ce lac dur oublié que hante sous le givre
Le transparent glacier des vols qui n’ont pas fui !

Un cygne d’autrefois se souvient que c’est lui
Magnifique mais qui sans espoir se délivre
Pour n’avoir pas chanté la région où vivre
Quand du stérile hiver a resplendi l’ennui.

Tout son col secouera cette blanche agonie
Par l’espace infligée à l’oiseau qui le nie,
Mais non l’horreur du sol où le plumage est pris.

Fantôme qu’à ce lieu son pur éclat assigne,
Il s’immobilise au songe froid de mépris
Que vêt parmi l’exil inutile le Cygne.

Stéphane Mallarmé Le cygne



My grandfather told me that he had seen Osamu Dazai at a literary gathering before his death. My grandfather and Dazai were at the same university. However, my grandfather was poor, so his method of admission was different from that of Dazai and his friends. My grandfather was a brilliant man at the time, so much so that the state paid for him. Such was my grandfather’s desire to become a poet.

He seemed particularly fond of Mallarmé and was confident that he was Mallarmé’s successor because he was glittery. In this context, he seems to have once attended a meeting where Osamu Dazai was present. From his point of view, Dazai at that time looked like an idiot. Nevertheless, those around Dazai listened to him happily. When such Dazai discussed Mallarmé, my grandfather’s heart could not contain his anger. The writer he likes is told in a distorted way by someone he dislikes, but that person is better able to publish a book. My grandfather told me about this reality.If anything, feelings have left more of an impression on me than my grandfather’s words. This is because he, who spoke calmly about everything, was unusually excited and spoke of the scene as if it were right in front of him. I thought I could see a little of the scene of those days, the elated gathering of unknown writers and revolutionaries in a small, cramped room. My grandfather disgraced the gathering as a wayward affair, but he told me. ‘He talks about the boring things in the world in a funny way. People find it fun to be together with that. That sounds like you. Why don’t you become a writer? Because I never had that talent.”

At the time, I was in primary school and didn’t know much about Mallarmé or Dazai. In his study, Mallarmé and Valéry were on a bookshelf with a glass door like a sanctuary, and it was forbidden to open it. “If you want them, I’ll give you money for them,” he used to say. But I had a hunch about what kind of literature he liked.When I then went straight into law and psychology, which I did not do immediately, my grandfather said. ‘Don’t forget. Poetry is the greatest. But I didn’t listen. Inwardly, I instinctively wanted to surpass my grandfather’s bright glittering.


When I was a student, psychology’s ‘unconscious’ was already oriented towards denial. The unconscious does not exist’ and the epistemology of the unconscious in phenomenology, in the midst of Jaspers’ scathing critique of Freud, worked to expand own horizons as much as possible.

I also wrote a dissertation on the collective unconscious as a student, it was like looking verge of death ‘fact’. After finishing one novel that drew on this experience, I moved my thoughts to the phenomenology of philosophy. Jung’s psychotherapy was confession, clarification, education and transformation, but it is probably self-evident how psychotherapy was formulated, since today we are mostly not told about such things. I won’t say much on this point, which touches on medical practice too much, But I don’t know whether the domain of the subconscious can be totally denied. In this article, I will talk a little about the chaos that is the influence behind the human phenomenon.

This time, A friend asked me to chat with him about the death of a family member. It was just that, but it made me remember my grandfather. It did not always have my grandfather in my consciousness. Neither Dazai nor Mallarmé had been touched by anything in the vicinity before or after that. Yet I remembered. I looked again at what my grandfather had told me, that Dazai had talked about Mallarmé, and I found a mention of Mallarmé in a story entitled Das gemeine.

Das Gemeine (The Commonplace) was German, so I was late to realise that it was related to Mallarmé, a French writer. Besides, Osamu Dazai is more prominent in other novels. Nevertheless, Dazai was certainly unusual in Das Gemeine in appearing himself as ‘Osamu Dazai’. It is uncertain whether his grandfather heard about the draft at the time. My recollections were consistent, although there was no evidence. I had a good time while searching for Mallarmé and Dazai Osamu. Tracing the attachments of the deceased, whose generations and values were far apart, was like following the traces of their souls.

 Remembering the deceased may not be all that can be immediately recalled. Takehiko Fukunaga’s chapter on love in his book ‘An Attempt at Love’ was an illustration regarding ‘blind spots’. Blind spots in life are not something that can be explained in academic terms. Thus, they are always in places where we are not conscious of them due to human subtleties.

As a child, my grandfather was from a family so poor that they did not even have electricity. In this situation, he went almost exclusively on scholarship to places where he was invited to attend meetings of Dazai and revolutionaries. The gatherings there was a silly affair for the rich and trivial for busy students like my grandfather. He said that those gatherings were all dreaming, fruitless, and a joke. But did my grandfather really think it was trivial, or was there something else besides consciousness? Otherwise, would he have said to me, “Why don’t you become a writer?”


Jung and Freud emphasized ‘confession’ in psychotherapy. This is because people who are highly conscious speak reasonably well in their ‘explanations’ but do not ‘confess’. Confession is very difficult. There are not many such occasions. Too much unconscious bias can also lead to assumptions.

But questioning the unconscious, like metaphor, is going out of date. My grandfather’s statement did not show any purpose, it was simply a coincidence. I am sure of it, but I was a little girl when I said I would ‘take it back’ from Das gemeine – the commonplace – and if you look at me now, it is as if I had just lived for it. This story is a ‘confession’ that consciousness did not suppress.

For why, I was never able to ask my grandfather the truth about whether he liked Mallarmé and poetry or not. No one in the family knew. Surely they would not have understood it even if it had been told to them. And yet, the story of Mallarmé and my grandfather’s upbringing, and why Dazai didn’t like him just by talking about Mallarmé, is the only story that comes to light. Mallarmé tried to live by poetry, even without God.

Mallarmé was discouraged from committing suicide thanks to his poetry, but his views and beliefs on life and death were the exact opposite of Dazai’s. First, Mallarmé is difficult to understand and is considered difficult to visualize unless one has a good understanding of French. The Japanese translation of Mallarmé’s poems is difficult to imagine. The French book of Mallarmé seemed to have been given to my grandfather by the church. He also seemed to have read the Bible that was given to him with it, but my grandfather was not a Christian. 

He then said – what I find myself thinking there is no God does not coincide with the world. On the contrary, thinking that there is a God is also not in agreement with the world. He said that it is ” fault ” only to talk about the world in terms of what you absolutely think. He taught that one should always be aware of contradictions, even if they are religious or non-religious. Only poetry and literature can speak of ‘the world’. 

We live in constant contradiction.

There is no way of knowing exactly what my grandfather was thinking, but Mallarmé’s ‘swan sonnets’ reflected his soul: that the human world is empty, an existence that returns to nothing, and that even if it is godless and empty, there is ‘a beauty that exists without fail’. Whether it was hope or certainty, my grandfather seemed to believe in an existence that emerged from the concepts of absence and nothingness. It is not confined to images or language, but makes our hearts beat faster. 

Given the historical background of my grandfather’s time, I think it was a mystery that he saw while living in poverty and wartime: The reality, which could not easily believe in God or miracles. 

When the once shining swan fades away, being sadly aware why in the poem it was perceived as if it had broken the ice powerfully, the strength to be kept alive by the emotional image of the swan.

  How does it make sense for an absent object to flap its wings.


Recently I was considering the Tale of the Heike. The world in sound, narrated by the biwa priest, does not make the meaning of language clear. In the world conveyed by sound, the characters forget that the dead are dead and the world of ‘sight’ expands. The Tale of the Heike is also a requiem to heal the souls of the dead, and one’s own soul, by listening to others’ stories. In today’s age of only directness, there are very few people who can get this story. People who do not know that their perceptions are limited are weak. Those who may believe in the possibility that even if they do not understand now, they will be capable of understanding later are strong. Mallarmé’s poem ‘The Swan sonnet’ would collapse as a poem if translated directly into Japanese, so I have drawn on my own interpretation. 

I am not familiar with Mallarmé due to the circumstances, but I took the opportunity to translate the poems in a hurry. I think I was able to do it this time because of the poets surrounding Mallarmé, the literary and philosophical paths, and the various experiences. The people I wanted to show the translation to will never see it, but it will be a requiem for the dead, left to those who are still alive. With an icy confession, that even in a place that is only an end, like a place of exile, life becomes a strong wish and a requiem, as the Cygnus shines. And in our hearts.



 My friend’s father died. So I was asked to chat about it, but it didn’t immediately spring to mind. But then I remembered my dead grandfather, if this is what you call unconsciousness. It was about my grandfather meeting the writer Osamu Dazai. In Japan, there is a story called The Tale of the Heike. That story is a great long story, a mixture of actual history and fantasy. The story is told by a blind monk. By doing so, he requiems the souls that are dead and the souls that are listening. Looking at oneself from a completely unrelated story is like Mallarmé’s poem ‘The Swan’. 

Poems about absence made my heart leap.


The tale of the Heike



まだ知ることなく 留まることのない 美しい今日を





私の祖父が生前に文学の集まりで太宰治を見たことがあると言っていた。祖父と太宰は同じ大学だった。しかし祖父は貧困の家の出なので入学の仕方が太宰達とは違った。祖父は当時、県や国がお金を払うほどの努力の人だった。そんな祖父は詩人になりたかった。マラルメを特に好んでいたようで、彼は優秀だったので自分こそがマラルメを引き継げると自負があった。そんな中で彼は太宰治がいるところに一回だけ参加したことがあった。 彼から見たら、当時の太宰は阿保にしか見えなかった。けれども太宰の周りは楽しそうに彼の話を聞く。そんな太宰がマラルメを語ったときに、祖父の心はかき乱された。自分が好きな作家が嫌いな人に歪曲され、その人のほうが本を出せる。その現実を、祖父は語ってくれた。どちらかといえば、祖父の言葉よりも感情のほうが印象に残っている。冷静になんでも答えるその人が、その光景が見えているかのように語るからだ。私はその当時の光景を狭くて小さな部屋で無名作家や革命家が集まる意気揚々とした様子が少し見えたような気がした。祖父はその集まりを道楽だと貶したが、私に言った。太宰は……「世の中のつまんない事も面白おかしく話す。みんなそれで一緒にいて楽しいと思う。それはお前に似ているな。お前は作家になったらどうか? おじいちゃんにはその才能がなかったからな」


私が学生時代のころは既に心理学の「無意識」は否定の方向*へと向かっていた。 現代は特に忌み嫌われている。「無意識は存在しない」現象学においての無意識へのエポケー(括弧)は、ヤスパースの痛烈なフロイト批判の最中、自分の視野を出来るだけ拡大することに務める。主観と客観と世界、それらの布置を適格に把握しようとする動きによって進んでいた。私も、学生時代に集合的無意識の論文を書いたが、それはまるで瀕死の事実を看取るような気分だった。その経験を生かした小説を一本仕上げた後は哲学の現象学に移動した。ユングの心理療法は告白、解明、教育、変容(transformation)であったが、現代がそんな事を聞かされない事が大半なので、どのように心理療法が定まったのか自明だろう。あまり医療行為にも触れるこの点は多くは語らないが、無意識という領域は完全否定出来るものなのか分からない。今回は少し、人間現象の背後に影響がある混沌について語ろうと思う。


ダスゲマイネというのは「Das Gemeine(通俗的)」とドイツ語だったので、マラルメというフランス作家に結びつくのが遅れた。それに太宰治といえば他の小説のほうが目立っている。それでも確かにダスゲマイネに太宰は自身を「太宰治」として登場させている珍しい作品だった。その当時の草案を祖父は聞いたのか、それは定かではない。私の想起は、証拠こそないが辻褄が合っていた。探している間、楽しいひと時を過ごした。世代も価値観も、懸け離れていた家族が好きだったものを辿ることは、魂の痕跡を辿っているようだったのだ。故人の記憶というものは、すぐに思い返せるものが全てではないのかもしれない。福永武彦が「愛の試み」で綴った愛の章で、「盲点」に関しては挿話だった。人生の中の盲点とは学術用語で説明できるものではない。このように、人間の機微によって必ず意識されないところに在る。


 ユングとフロイトは心理療法で「告白」を重視していた。それは意識が強い人は「説明」は理路整然と話すが「告白」をしないからである。告白というものは中々難しい。そのような場はあまり存在しないからだ。無意識に偏りすぎると思い込みというのが発生する。 無意識への問いかけは、隠喩のように必要とされなくなっている。祖父の発言は何か目的を見せることもなく、単なる偶然によるものだった。それは確かではあるが、ダスゲマイネ――通俗的 というものから、取ってあげると言った幼い私は、今の私を見たら恰もそのために生きていたかのようになった。今回の話は時代と共に廃れた意識によって抑圧なき「告白」である。






私は最近「平家物語」を見直していた。 琵琶法師が語り部である音での世界は、言語の意味は明確にしない。音で伝える世界は死者が死んだことを忘れて登場人物達は「視覚」の世界が広がっている。直截ばかりの今の時代で、この話が通じる人は少ないと思う。平家物語もまた、人の話を通して死者の魂と、自分の魂を癒す鎮魂である。自分の認識が限界であることを知らない人は弱い。今は分からなくても、後から分かるようになるという可能性を信じられる人は強い。マラルメの詩の「白鳥のソネ」は日本語にそのまま翻訳すると難解だったので、私自身の解釈に寄せている。マラルメは事情があって私は不案内でしたが、この機に急遽、翻訳した。マラルメを囲っている詩人や文学、哲学の道、様々な経験が生かされて今回は出来たのだと思う。翻訳した姿を見せたかった人が見ることはないが、それが生きている人に残された、死者の鎮魂になることを信じて。氷解するような告白と共に、流刑の地のように終でしかない居場所でも、白鳥座のように生が強く願い鎮魂となるということを。そして心のうちに


* マラルメ論 著:サルトル


Man’s Search for Meaning (English)

All of us in the camps knew and told each other that there was no happiness on earth that could compensate us for our troubles.

…trotzdem Ja zum Leben sagen:Ein Psychologe erlebt das Konzentrationslager
Viktor Emil Frankl

  1. First
  2. Second
  3. Third
  4. Fourth
  5. Fifth
  6. Last


Room 18 in the basement of the Auschwitz camp was the prison where Father Kolbe was held. Why is there a small window there? What did the sunshine mean? It was such a space, a mediocre room that a painter could paint rest in a poor hut, if analogy could be made. It smelled like dust and rust on my nose, and I don’t remember what the temperature was that day. Painful seems to rob me of a sense of the four seasons. I continue to listen to the color of my skin floating in the dark space and the description not in my native language, and I only pay attention to the words of my phase. Cruel places where many people have died, in fact, are neither special nor exist in Japan. For example, the station where the sarin gas attack on the underground took place. I passed there many times when I was a student. Sometimes it is hard to describe the weight of the souls that were cruelly taken away from us.

Not only that, but the Auschwitz camp was also a place where God and Jesus Christ did not come to save. Evidence of this can be seen everywhere in the other prisons, where crosses were dug into the ground with nails. They would have begged and pleaded, but salvation never came. It signals the despair of the invisible soul.


In the concentration camps prepared by Nazi-Deutschland, it was not only people who died in gas chambers or from poison. Others died of suicide, starvation and disease. Deaths in the facilities, all of which are lumped together in the death toll of the camps, make concentration camps the root of evil. There were other dictatorships in other countries, but it seems to be a chosen place that has been so clearly narrated and left behind. We cannot easily ask locals about dictatorships in other countries. Comparatively speaking, the camps in Poland, which can be visited like Auschwitz, are an asset.

Why would something that was a democracy produce such a tragedy, I will not go into the details of German history this time. However, the birth of Nazi Germany was also a democracy for its time. In the case of Japan, the first thing that comes to mind is national review. How effective the national review is (Article 79 of the Constitution of Japan) is not clear to most people, although we know how it works, because none of the judges have yet been dismissed from the national review.

Realizations always spring up ‘after the fact’. There is a delusion about ‘democracy’ and democratic politics, but if there is cruelty, it is now hidden in the micro rather than the macro. Emotions from personal experience are not a problem, but the emotions of incidents happening on the other side of the world are just ‘excitement’ when you get right down to it. For example, If a celebrity commits suicide, you have feelings about it as if it were your own family. but Today, that would be a nuisance to the bereaved family.

Even if the bereaved family cries for understanding in a TV broadcast, if viewers sympathies with them and post it on social media, they are sued for defamation. For the victims, they make a fuss about being told by others without their knowledge. Only equivalent celebrities have the right to sympathy for the people on the other side of the television. That has become the modern age. More and more we are being meta and not exposed to the phenomenon.

Thus, in contemporary discourse, the view that it is not the fault of a single building, such as a camp, becomes natural. medical malpractice, or the problems in the schools, about what happened in that one space. It was suicide, so it was self-inflicted – it was starvation, so it had nothing to do with it – the cause of death was illness. ‘They didn’t all die the same way in the same space. So there is no scientific basis for it’ That is the modern world.

The ‘counter-existence’ is formed by what is given by the ‘counter-other’. One, if it is called ‘death without evidence’, its existence is determined. How do we accept the gaze that determines it? Do we take on that gaze honestly, or do we have a subjective self as a ‘counter-self’ in the Sartre sense? The difference between the objective gaze and the subjective self is ‘freedom’. V. E. Frankl in Man’s Search for Meaning also held on to ‘hope’ in Auschwitz, against the positioned decision. This is not a particularly unusual story, as it has been a guiding principle since the time of the Epictetus regarding servitude and freedom.


I was shown the Gulf War on television when I was in primary school. Classes were interrupted and we kept watching the bulletins, which showed people lying under the rubble. Night vision technology was a hot topic at the time, and we were shown how easy it was to hit the target, even in an operation to set fire to an oil field on the Iraqi side to spread smoke. After saying that they would have been killed, the comment was made that it was probably a mother and son. Whether it was a US soldier, my memory is not clear. It was so disheartening that I wondered if people had really died at this moment. The homeroom teacher at the time explained that if there is a war now, it will not be like Grave of the Fireflies, and that weapons have evolved like night vision devices.

Grave of the Fireflies

As well as not doubting that all human beings are equal, we vaguely believed (as a certainty) that we had peace with Article 9 of the Constitution. Nevertheless, having children write about their thoughts on peace was as if to say that they can only write about it when they are children. Why do adults make children write, and why do adults stop saying it? Why do parents and homeroom teachers end up ‘teaching’ children? Why are people who talk about peace guests? Teachers and people close to them do not talk about what they know. People whose personal lives are not affected go home talking about their war experiences.

Eventually, as they grow up, some of their friends wake up and realis that what they have received was a left-wing education. Why is Article 9 supposedly admired around the world, but the world does not emulate it? Other countries have armies as normal. When ‘we’ raise questions about it, the world accuses us of leaning to the right. Yet the world calls that awakening ‘evil’. But that is only a fragment of the world. We don’t know the essence of the world. Article 9 of the Constitution is only a corner of it. The country of Japan is not as ‘known’ as it should be. But this is just another world I have walked through. The world is a wide place. The right answer is probably just as complex and wide.

It is not certain that even the Gulf War images seen at that time were real. The only reliable fact that can be traced back is “Stock price”. Stock price records seem to be the universal language. Analysis is subject to interpretation, but the figures do not lie: after Iraq invaded Kuwait on 2 August 1990, stock prices fell vertically. This is followed by a slump in October and November, but a slight rebound in December.17 January 1991, the Gulf War begins with the bombing of Iraq by Multinational Force Iraq.

Afterwards, it recovers to the same level as before the invasion of Kuwait. What was the tragedy we saw in the classroom then, and did the parents and children really die then? As an adult, I look at stock prices and other prices as if to overcome my childhood fears. When the contingency of war is also a certainty, the market raises expectations. Stocks recover as if the feeling of fear is ignorance.


I had a strong sense of existentialism when I went back to my memory. Probably the generation that saw the Gulf War as children tended towards existential philosophy. (Strictly, with the ideal that existentialism could change the frustration that builds up) And those who educated us were inclined towards structuralism. Even John Paul II praised the structuralist Lévi-Strauss as a good philosopher.

Sartre and Husserl phenomenology were overshadowed, but the more they were hidden, the more I followed my ‘uncertain certainties’, because there was no being close at hand to answer the experiences I felt. Is what you see reflected in my mind something that is connected to the world? Yet it exists, even outside of consciousness. Even while we are asleep, the real world is stirring outside our consciousness. News of war is only part of reality. Of course, it is difficult to make a clear distinction between structure or existence as to why I felt the way I did about what is handed to me by the world. In all of them there is something to sympathies with and feel. 

Our generation was educated by those who did not benefit from the bursting of the Economic bubble, so the world was seen as ironic. At the same time, we were given a lot of dreams that never existed, such as ‘people are equal’. And even after a crisis like 911 in 2001, the economy always recovered: a 10% fall followed by a quick rebound. In fact, it was the Enron collapse in December 2001 and the WorldCom accounting fraud in June 2001 that caused the big drop. War would end the world, and it was only natural that this perception would fade.


What do you think of Auschwitz? When asked that question, existence itself is a wall away for those of us who don’t think of everyday life in terms of war. What mattered was the world of peacetime. Man’s Search for Meaning were reinterpreted for 911 in a new translation in 2003. While the brutal images from the camps in the old translation have been erased, we have seen only the fireworks of peace slogans in the reality of the Iraq war. We bemoan the youth who don’t know human pain, but when we were children, we compensated for it with our imagination. But it didn’t mean anything when we understood it. The metadata personality of ‘not knowing human pain’ was formed that way even after the war. That would be an undeniable fact. 

Hannah Arendt warned that people imprisoned at Auschwitz would be forgotten over time. She referred to the tortured deaths of those held at Auschwitz, and the deaths forgotten with the passage of time, as a double death. This would be the Auschwitz camp I visited. The records as historical are not imbued with the space. In Room 18, where Father Kolbe was, there was just an empty space inside. He lived his life without thinking in terms of contingencies, and that is a testimony. What would this place look like if you came here with no prior information and an English translation for tourists? Events do not speak beyond information. Existence precedes essence “We mean that man first of all exists” It is an endlessly silent, somehow felt suppression. The meaning of the building’s existence continues to be expressed by human beings. The marks of the cross engraved with nails do not name the scribe. The proof that God did not come is still only despair. They say that it was futile to pray, or that Sartre was an atheist, but Frankl, who was imprisoned in Auschwitz, as a psychologist, left ‘hope’ behind.

In Auschwitz, a place where there is no creative freedom, he remained strong that only his inner life would not be taken away from him. There would naturally be a hidden escape. Those who believed they would be liberated by Christmas committed suicide on Christmas Day with the current of the iron bars. That is why Frankl feared easy hope. In the camps, some people gave alms to others even though they were suffering, while others became mad demons. In the absence of any soul-operating experience, he said that only the value of attitude would not be taken away, even in a place where it was not known whether God would come or not. It includes ‘prayer’.

When Man’s Search for Meaning was published(new translation)in 2003, it was introduced that those of us who had not experienced anything as bad as Auschwitz should naturally have ‘hope’. I thought at the time that was a little different. I thought about the meaning of why Frankl wrote about ‘hope’, which he portrayed in the midst of cruelty, rather than the ‘cruelty’ of Auschwitz.

The historical fact of Auschwitz comes in different forms. That is because human misery is inevitable. I think, even in retrospect, that I was a Sartre ‘condemned to be free’. We have always been forced to feel happy because we are at peace. But in fact, this is not the case. Only those who have known misery can realis this. Even if there is no war, everyone has misfortune, like Hisako Nakamura, who lost both arms. Hisako, who lost both arms due to illness, was brought up strictly by her mother. Like her, everyone falls into a situation where the ‘home’ itself is like a prison camp. Hisako, who was missing both arms, was given a sewing kit by her mother. Without arms, sewing means using the mouth. Naturally, saliva would get on it, but her mother did not allow it. When Hisako learned to sew, she showed the audience how she sewed as the ‘Daruma Maiden’ at a freak show, still holding a grudge against her mother.

Hisako Nakamura

Nevertheless, Hisako forgave her mother and was grateful. While this was based on her Jodo Shinshu teachings, she did not take what she was taught for granted. She realized that it was because of her mother’s strictness that she was able to become independent. But even today in Japan, although this idea is a beautiful story, the mother’s position is that of ‘abuse’. Society must provide ‘comprehensive’ support through welfare and other means to prevent this from happening. Frankl quoted Nietzsche on the most painful human suffering. ‘Suffering itself is not the problem. It is the lack of an answer to the cry ‘what is the cause of suffering’ that is the problem.”

This idea is a ‘freedom’ held by subjectivity, objecting to a given ‘being’. Frankl was also given the ‘fate’ of a dying Jew. But he held out hope. It is freedom but suffering. How freedom is a responsibility, and how heavy it is. Hisako is no different. From her position of being without both arms, she achieved a feat that was almost impossible. It is suffering, and it is ‘freedom’ that tried to overcome her position. All they are integrated into life as untold history. Auschwitz has become a metonymized entity: in Room 18, Father Kolbe took over the dying fate of other Jews. The world does not speak of them. It is ‘man’ who records them to the world. And yet, how many years can one leave behind? Why is it that the faces of anguish in paintings from centuries ago are still recognizable today? For example, Will Shakespeare still be around a hundred years from now? Why is it that what Father Kolbe did is still great today? It is man who makes sure that records are kept, but who creates the destiny that allows them to be kept?


Sartre, who was a genius, missed his prediction before the Second World War when he said that Germany would not go to war. How did a dictatorship arise in Germany, which was supposed to be a democracy? The question can still be asked today. However, there is inevitably no end to speech and violence. This is because there is a ‘will’ in people. The will cannot be unified: the Covid19 epidemic has not subsided, the war between Russia and Ukraine, and in Japan the controversy continues after the assassination of former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe on 8 July 2022. I cannot recall a word from my childhood when I could so easily reject these conflicts. Children today may be cleverer, but a child’s words are not allowed to cross the world. Maybe that is why it is children who can go to the Kingdom of Heaven. (Matthew 19:13-15) 

Our pursuit of human goodness is not always beautiful. We move away from heaven little by little as we defile our souls, as we defile ourselves, as we struggle. We cannot abandon it because we must live with ‘will’. Even if we put an end to today’s challenges, is it something that will dissolve into history and be forgotten, or is it something that will be imprinted on individual souls?

Keeping silent, like the adults of the past, certainly seems like a bad thing. But what if we cannot protect our precious beings if we do not answer the demands of fate? If adults fight, children lose their place in the world. If teachers have made deviant statements, children feel insecure. Maybe that’s why they kept quiet back then. Was it adult self-deception? Or was  ‘consideration’? It is not possible in heaven to know the complexity of human beings. Is that not the will to struggle to live? If the dead sleep-in peace, the living must awaken. It will come, even in silence. 

We must have experienced hardships and cruelty in each of our growing up years. We should not compare our misfortunes with others. Invariably, there is some trivial love left in people. The driving force behind Frankl’s books can be said to be Agape. Faith in human goodness would be to remember that. Even if, in any future situation.

Weeds were beautiful in Auschwitz.

――Like Mary at the feet of Jesus.




  1. 2
  2. 5


















2003年の「夜と霧」(新訳)の出版の際は、アウシュビッツほど酷い経験をしていない私達は、 当然ながら「希望」を持たなければならないと紹介されていた。私は、当時にそれは少し違うと思っていた。フランクルが何故、アウシュビッツの「残酷」さよりも、残酷の中でも抱いた「希望」を書いたのか意味を考えた。アウシュビッツという歴史的事実は、形を変えて訪れる。それは人間は不幸が避けられないからだ。私がサルトル的な「自由の刑」だったと振り返っても思う。私達は平和なのだから幸福に感じろと常に強いられてきた。けれども実際、そうではない。それは不幸を知っている人だけが気づけることだ。戦争という有事が無くても、両腕がなかった「中村久子」のように不幸は誰にもある。病気で両腕を失った久子は、母親に厳しく育てられた。彼女のように、「家庭」そのものが収容所のように誰しもが陥る。両腕がなかった久子は、母親に裁縫道具を渡された。腕が無ければ、縫うということは口を使う。当然、唾液がつくが、母親はそれを許さなかった。久子は、縫えるようになって、母親を恨んだまま見世物小屋で「だるま娘」として裁縫しているところを観客に見せた。


それでも、久子は母親を最後は許したうえに感謝した。それは彼女の浄土真宗の教えに基づいているが、教えられた事を鵜呑みにしたわけではなかった。彼女が自立出来たことは、母親の厳しさがあったからだと彼女は悟った。現代において日本でもこの考えは美談ではあるが、母親の位置づけは「虐待」となる。このようにならないように、社会は福祉等で「包括的」に支援しなければならない。人間の最も辛い苦悩をフランクルはニーチェの引用をした。「苦悩そのものが問題なのではない。『何のために苦悩するのか』という叫びに対する 答えのないことが問題なのである」

この考えは、与えられた「存在」に対して異議を唱え、主観が抱いた「自由」である。フランクルも死にゆくユダヤ人という「運命」を与えられた。しかし、彼は希望を抱いた。それは自由であるが苦悩である。自由が如何に責任を問われ、そして重たいのか。久子も同じである。両腕が無いという位置づけから、不可能に近い偉業を成し遂げた。それは苦悩であり、「自由」である。全て、それらは語らない歴史として、生活に溶け込んでいる。アウシュビッツはメタ化された存在になった。18牢にいたコルベ神父は、他のユダヤ人の死にゆく運命を代わった。それらを世界が語ることはない。残すのは「人間」である。それにしても、人が残せるものは何年なのだろうか。何世紀も前の絵画の苦悩の顔が、現代でも通じるのは何故なのだろうか。シェークスピアはあと100年後も残っているのだろうか? 何故、コルベ神父がしたことが現代でも凄いことなのか。残すようにしているのは人間だが、残せるような運命を創っているのは、誰なのだろうか。

天才だったサルトルは、第二次世界大戦前に、「ドイツは戦争しない」と予想を外した。民主主義だったはずのドイツに、どうして独裁政権が生まれたのか。その問いは、現代でも通じることがある。言論や暴力はどうしても尽きることがない。そこには、人に「意思」があるからである。意思を統一することは出来ない。Covid19の流行は収まらず、ロシアとウクライナの戦争、日本では2022年7月8日の安倍晋三元首相の暗殺後も論争が絶えない。私は、このような争いを簡単に拒めた子供時代の言葉を思い出すことは出来ない。今の子供はもっと賢いのかもしれないが、子供の言葉というものは、世の中を渡ってはいけない。だからこそ、天の国に行けるのは子供なのかもしれない。(マタイによる福音書 19章13節~15節)人間の善意の追求が必ずしも美しいわけではない。魂を薄汚しながら、穢れながら、争いながら、少しずつ天国から遠ざかっていく。それを放棄することが出来ないのは、「意思」を持って生きなければならないからである。今日の課題に終止符を打ったとしても歴史に溶けて忘れ去れるものなのか、個々の魂に刻み込まれるものなのか。

嘗ての大人たちのように沈黙することは確かに、悪のように思える。しかし、運命の要求に答えなければ、大切な存在を守れないとすればどうだろうか。大人が争うということは子供の居場所を失うことに繋がる。教師が逸脱した発言をしたとなれば、子供達は不安になる。だから、彼等はあの当時は黙っていたのかもしれない。それは大人の自己欺瞞か? それとも、「配慮」だったのか。人間の複雑さを知れるのは、天の国では叶わない。それが生きる闘争への意志ではないのだろうか。死者が安らかに眠るのなら、生きているものは目覚めなければならない。それは、黙っていても必ず訪れる。




Mein Söhnlein, ich wünsche dir – ich wünsche dir –Ich wünsche dir, daß alle Menschen dich liebhaben müssen.“

I wish for you — I wish for you —“ “I wish for you that everyone will love you.”

Hermann Hesse. Augustus .


Mysterious neighbors lived in a house with beautiful music. When the little music box was playing, the mother prayed for her pre-baptized baby to be loved by everyone. It was the arrangement of that elderly neighbor. As soon as the music box stopped playing, the mother feared that she had made a mistake in her wish.

Why did the mother become so anxious and unable to stand after reciting her wish? Was it that she regretted the mistake of ‘witchcraft’, which is heresy, or that her mother knew the nature of social evil? Or is the mother under the spell too?  Consequently, the mother told her son, that anyone who loves you, I love you the most. Soon, the mother’s fears were spot on and her son became a beloved and ruthless person.


The author Hermann Hesse’s work sometimes seems to have his own ‘record’ deep within the words. Here is a brief account of Hesse’s upbringing: first, he retires from the rigors of his pastor’s seminary and escapes. Then his parents ask for an exorcism, which is unsuccessful, He was followed by a suicide attempt. After a stay in a psychiatric ward, he enters the Gymnasium but is frustrated and escapes. His apprenticeship as a watchmaker is also a setback, and perhaps as a reflection of the introspection and self-discipline of the time, he once retired the booksellers,but is satisfied with his job as a clerk at the Heckenhauer bookshop. His ‘Unterm Rad‘ is a striking reflection of his upbringing in seminary, but ‘Demian‘, ‘Das Nachtpfauenauge‘ and others also seem to reveal a record of Hesse’s mind.

I sometimes think of the text as Hesse’s own voice speaking in transference to the characters. This may be due to his characteristic Buddhist look at destruction and creation, the broken, the passing of time and death. At the time, he himself was often asked by people whether he was a Buddhist, although he had travelled to India but had not studied Buddhism professionally. Augustus was written in 1913, before the First World War, and it remains as applicable to any period or life, not destroyed by war.


Augustus is one of the works in ‘Märchen’, which I had read a little of as a child, and the story that made an impression on me was ‘Merkwurdige nachricht von einem andern stern‘, in which all the flowers to mourn were lost in a disaster. With only ten years of experience and imagination since birth, Augustus had difficulties. It was difficult because I had no special experience of being loved by anyone. At the time, I did not even really understand what love was, and I cannot remember ever having received love from anyone other than my parents.

I was taught that in the Christen nation, love is something that relates to you and nurtures you, but I never understood it. Sometimes I didn’t know whether even the word ‘gratitude’ was something I really felt, or whether it was something I felt for social reasons. In Buddhist school, I concentrated on listening to a talk about ‘death’, which began with the idea that from the moment we are born, we are on our way to death.

I did not dislike religious events, and I was an attendant, a kind of a Acolyte in Christianity. My classmates from schools without religious education told me they felt sorry for me having religious events. Even then, I probably didn’t think about who loved me. I was always looking for a place where I could love and be loved.  Sometimes the question of being alive made me hope for a successful me, and sometimes I wondered if there was any point in living as I would never become anything anyway. Nevertheless, I thought we all had a little bit of that, so I didn’t pay attention to it. I went to university, which had nothing to do with religion. There I translated Hesse in German.


At the time, Augustus was not yet able to make an analysis. I probably learnt about this story, which embodies Matthew 5: ‘Blessed are the poor in spirit’, at university or in a commentary. For those young days when life was like walking on a balance beam, financial poverty was one thing, but poverty of heart was hard to accept. No matter how careful I was, I would fall, and for me, who kept myself alive in that way, poverty seemed to throw me off balance. Why did Augustus’ mother use witchcraft to raise her child, her fault was alien to me. She lost her husband, her father, soon after, and it seems to me that she was so poor that in the future her children would have to become university professors or kings to survive.

The neighbor, Binswanger and her friend Madam could each give her mother one silver coin, two in all, but he said he couldn’t do any more. He took pity on her and offered to grant her a wish. His mother’s wish that he should be loved by everyone was granted and Augustus manipulated people at will. Everyone loved him, no one doubted him, and everyone gave alms to him. This turned into a convenient position for his mother. Whether the mother’s love was due to witchcraft or essential motherhood, only the mother spoiled her son, but she was outraged by his excessive rudeness and coldness towards others. The mother subsequently dies of illness.

Leaving behind, Augustus fell in love with a widow, but soon grew tired of her. Next, he fell in love with a lady who had a husband and tried to take her away from him, although the lady said strangely, ‘ I can’t stop loving you, but I prefer to stay with my husband.’. It was as if she really cared for her husband but her love for him had been distorted by magic. Eventually he asked his neighbor to extinguish his power to be loved. After that, the public’s view of Augustus changed. All the resentments he had never felt and all the sins he had committed fell on him and he was put in jail. and When he came out of prison, he roamed the world through his illness, seeking a place where his love could live. Yet this time people loved him no one. They bullied him and shook his hand away. In the midst of it all, he loved and served people.

He died in the end with a richness of heart from all kinds of poverty. That story was not something I wanted to think about when I was young. If one was poor, one could not live, that is what I had to think. Poverty is not always financial, and there was something I did not want to acknowledge, even poverty about the heart. Certainly, as a fairy tale, poorness is a beautiful thing. But in Grimm’s fairy tales and others, such as “Die Sterntaler” alms were given to the poor, and hope for the common people was grace. However, religions sometimes teach that it is happiness to have nothing in return for grace.

It is not only Christianity, but Buddhism has similar teachings. However, I thought that idea would defeat the spirit and I don’t think it was a mistake. I was aware of how important it was, but it didn’t make an impression on me. Many years later, I never picked up the story or remembered it. In my professional life, I may talk about Hesse, but I pick up stories other than this one. Originally, I did not even pick up Matthew 5, even though I understood its meaning. This story was a so-called ‘blind spot’.


In the Buddhist chapter on the Eight Verses, it is said that saints do not undergo sorting and are not caught up in delusional sorting. Delusional discernment – to be caught up in what one understands, which is Avidyā. (ignorance)This was in line with the ‘Blessed are the poor’ of Matthew*. In this passage, the saint is the Buddha, who taught his disciples the precept of peacefulness, not to separate oneself from the superior or the inferior. In another section, it is mentioned as one of the preparations before death not to be conceited in keeping the precepts.

Blessed be the Lord in the book of Matthew is one of Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount. The Ten Commandments of Moses in the Old Testament were sacred precepts. However, many people mistakenly believed that as long as they kept the law, they would be happy. So they oppressed and persecuted those who could not keep it. The poor people heard of Jesus’ ministry and followed him to the mountaintop. Luke’s Gospel, written from a different perspective, says ‘Blessed are the poor’ and refers only to financial poverty in Greek, whereas Matthew’s Gospel clearly means ‘the poor in spirit’ and internal, spiritual things as well. Jesus has continued to liberate the world’s marginalized people, the oppressed and sinners with love.

It was not the absolute power that people expected, and some were not sober. Jesus spoke of the ‘poor in heart’, the ‘sorrowful’, the ‘meek’, those who ‘hunger and thirst for righteousness’, as those for whom the kingdom of heaven is yours, blessed are you. When Jesus was asked by his disciples what was most important in the Law, he quoted from the Old Testament books such as Deuteronomy, saying that ‘love’ was the most important part of the Law. Love was not something that could be clearly defined as good or evil. That is why Jesus’ parables, and his light also generated a lot of emotion and misunderstanding. Nonetheless, this ‘Blessed are the poor in spirit’ has been handed down as the core of a long history. Even if you abhor this verse, you will eventually understand it if we continue in the life of faith.


Was Augustus’ gift regarding ‘love’ a gift or a curse? This may be an indication of Hermann Hesse’s value of the gift. Hesse said, “I want to be a poet, otherwise I want to be nothing”, but as a man who attempted suicide, he would have known that a gift was also a handicap. A gift is a talent given by God, but we don’t know how to increase it. I am a recipient of grace, and we understand that, but we can’ t get any comfort from it. The human heart does not move according to the physical laws. Whether it’s physical hopelessness or blindness, it’s always hard to figure out how to live and where to find yourself.

This Märchen likened the two-sidedness that society possesses to ‘love’. If we say that the Providence of God us, hardship and grace are mundanely mixed and not easily identifiable. Augustus continued to receive love for the world. Others loved him and kept giving him things that were of no value to him. His growing ruthlessness signaled an allegory for a man who no longer felt God’s love. It seemed to be a projection of Hesse himself, who chose to commit suicide. He may have thought that way when he looked back on what it was like to choose death. Happiness does not come immediately after coming back to life, as manifested in his escapist habits and style. Nevertheless, Augustus knew that the world was wonderful and lovable. He thought he should travel the world in order to help people one way or the other and find places where he could show his love.

During this journey, Augustus fulfils his oppressed and distorted heart with happiness. Christianity teaches that those who had hoped for earthly things find their hope in God. But what does it mean for God, a higher being, to give us happiness? Sometimes it is difficult to understand this even when it is explained to us in words. God is far away, one wall away, if not everyday. The philosopher Simone Weil tries to put God in brackets for once (Epoché), but even Augustus fulfilled his heart on a journey where there is no such thing as happiness in the eyes of others, where he was marginalized and unloved. Buddhist ‘senselessness’ is close to this.

Er wunderte sich täglich, wieviel Elend es auf der Welt gäbe und wie vergnügt doch die Menschen sein können,

He was amazed each day at how much misery there was in the world and how content people could be nevertheless,

Das Menschenleben schien ihm vorzüglich eingerichtet.

To him, human life seemed marvelously well arranged.

so daß ihm schien, er habe die Welt niemals anders gesehen als heute; aber er war zufrieden und fand die Welt durchaus herrlich und liebenswert.

Gradually his memory too grew clouded so that it seemed to him as though he had never seen the world other than it was on that day. But he was content with it and found it altogether splendid and deserving of love.

He learned to love the world, although he was not loved or given expensive gifts as before. Besides, he dared to willingly choose hunger and suffering. So far, it ends up being Buddhist, but if I were to explain the difference, it would be that the Mächen has arrived at the point where ‘for theirs is the kingdom of heaven’. Augustus had reached his Godfather, the only kind man who had given him gifts and disabilities. The house was a house where music often played, and in his last days he felt as if he could hear his late mother’s voice, and he ascended to heaven.

Is this defeat and pessimism in life? I remember once thinking so. But it is different. Märchen’s death is different from death in the real world. He actually died, but it becomes an allegory and enters people’s hearts. What it means to be happy even if you are poor-hearted, as Jesus said in his parable, is something that cannot be explained by the laws of physics.

Yet everyone realizes that if you put yourself in a world of mystery and compare yourself with the allegory, you will find that the story is not particularly exotic either. We cannot explain how it can move our hearts. But when we connect God and Jesus, we call it the Holy Spirit. This may be the most difficult Holy Spirit to explain.


We sometimes close our hearts only to what we can see and feel. Who will let us know that next to the death knell, there is life coming into being, the joy of the unseen? Thus hope must transcend what separates. Just as the ego awakens again and again in childhood, just as the familiar work of art seems to be buried in a dead corner and then reappears. People are always waiting for something to resonate in their souls, whether it is a day of joy or a day when they want to disappear in sorrow. As if one learns the name of the being in front of one’s eyes, one is moved by a familiar sight.

Augustus was poor himself but could see the poverty of others. He had become unloved and knew that his kindness and love could not be conveyed to others. By ‘poor-hearted ones’ he was addressing not only himself, but the world. He knew that the poverty he most wanted to convey could not deliver hope, that even though it was impossible to manipulate the Holy Spirit at will, who could move people’s hearts, he still knew what it meant to love, something that the world could still say was beautiful.

Beautiful music was the voice of a loved one. For him, it was his mother. The most beautiful music that has been flowing since before his death becomes the voice of his loved one. Overlapping the heavenly messenger with the voice of a loved one is both a desire and a happiness. I think I finally know why this passage is described as embodying the Gospel of Matthew, the poverty of heart that is universal no matter how much times change, and why this passage is taught as the core of being a Christian.

The mind dwells on the allegories given and the unknowable, and the places where we should be self-disciplined emerge and the poverty of our hearts. When the soul’s gaze by love looks out over the world, probably it raises the joy of being born into this world.

Rejoice and be glad.

Matthew 5:12


 Hermann Hesse’s Augustus is famous for embodying the ‘Blessed are the poor in spirit’ of Matthew 5.

This story is famous as the embodiment of the story. When I was a student, I was so desperate to be somebody that this story seemed like a defeat in life. I did not want to understand this poverty. Even now, I can’t say that understanding this poverty is right. But I do know that the words and love of Jesus, like the Holy Spirit of the Trinity, if this is something that needs to be understood with the heart, then the poverty of this story should be looked at with the gaze of the soul. If this is to be communicated to others, it is to know the suffering that cannot be communicated by force. Hesse’s suicide attempt and My experience overlapped with him. I had sympathy for Augustus. Even though the world loved me, I did not see it as love, I had become ruthless. I found myself becoming like Augustus. The fairy tales I couldn’t read as a child because I didn’t understand love, then the stories I ignored because poverty was so alien to me, became the stories I came closest to. Hesse.

wrote this in his work. “so familiar to him from childhood that it awoke echoes of the past in his soul.” About the love that Jesus wanted to convey not only to those who were wise or in authority.

Rest for the modern age that constantly tells us that this is the way it should be. Perhaps that is the hope.

My Buddhist boyfriend reads scripture in a familiar voice,
and ‘Rejoice and be glad‘ he recited from the Bible. It was so beautiful that it reminded me of Augustus by happenstance.

Continued in Matthew 13, Simone Weil


Mein Söhnlein, ich wünsche dir – ich wünsche dir –Ich wünsche dir, daß alle Menschen dich liebhaben müssen.

















Er wunderte sich täglich, wieviel Elend es auf der Welt gäbe und wie vergnügt doch die Menschen sein können,


Das Menschenleben schien ihm vorzüglich eingerichtet.


so daß ihm schien, er habe die Welt niemals anders gesehen als heute; aber er war zufrieden und fand die Welt durchaus herrlich und liebenswert.



これは人生の敗北であり厭世的なのだろうか? 嘗ての私はそう思っていた。しかし違うのである。メルヒェンの死は本当の死とは違う。実際に彼は死んだが、寓意となって人々の心に入り込んでいく。イエスがたとえ話をしたように、心貧しくなったとしても幸福だと思えることがどういうことか、それは物理法則では説明が出来ないことである。けれども、誰しもがこの寓意溢れる世界に身を置いて自分に照らし合わせたら、そんなに異国の話でもないことに気づく。どのように心を動かせるのか説明は出来ない。しかし神とイエスをつなぐとき、それを私達は「聖霊」という。これは最も説明がつかない聖霊なのかもしれない。





喜びなさい 大いに喜びなさい 





常にこうあるべきだと言い続ける現代に、休息を。それこそ希望なのかもしれない。お経を読みなれた仏教徒の彼の聖書朗読の「喜びなさい 大いに喜びなさい」があまりにも美しかったので、アウグストゥスを偶然思い出した。


Simone Weil-For laborer English

Simone Weil in Marseilles, early 1940s
・People who are considered 'invisible' need beauty and poetry.

・Laborers need beauty and poetry more than bread.

・Poets create beauty by giving attention to the real. Love acts the same way.

・It is only by chance that the most precious things in the world start to be called progress, or 'the genius that makes a statement through the ages'. It is unbearable to imagine that even the most precious things in this world are left to chance.

・Unbearably absent God. In this sense the world is God itself.

Simone Weil.


Simone Weil went to Germany in 1932-1933, a year before she entered the factory, to understand the foundations of fascism. She reported that the Nazis were not only taking advantage of the petty bourgeoisie, but also many unemployed and other vulnerable groups.

Weil wrote a letter to Father Perrin during her stay of a little more than two months. The contents of the letter were: She wrote to Father Perrin without hiding her own over-influence on collectivity, “If everyone sings Nazis songs, then I’ll sing them too, which is my weakness, but this is the way I exist.” and it did not hide the fact that it could be influenced by the negative impacts of negative influence. She was saving German exiles and raising her own questions about labor, unemployment and collectivity. At the end of 1934, Simone Weil left her teaching job to work in a factory as a pressman and decided to face the ‘monde réel’(Real)Before she joined the factory, she was obsessed with writing to ‘masterpieces’ and ‘posthumous works’. However, the idea was feel some delicacy about the real world. ‘I began to think that the interchangeable parts were laborer. Parts have more civil rights than people’, she said as she walked through the gate, showing her ID card with the number on her chest,

Simone Weil wrote a core called ‘Beauty and Poetry for laborer’.

I have long remained unsure of this vital nucleus. She quoted a poem by Homerosu at the beginning of her ‘Factory Diary’ (Reflections on Labor and Life). She had many reflections on classical literature, but at the same time she knew that poetry was meaningless to the laborer. She had experienced first-hand the mental and physical exhaustion of hard laborer and was thus troubled by the pointlessness of trying to be philosophical through the Bible. This is reflected in her own record of almost jumping into the Seine in disgust with factory life.

Her writings are characterized by a large number of disconnected chapters, as they were not formally prepared for publication in book form. It seems to be an inclusion structure, a structure in which statements implying contradictions make sense inclusively and mutually, as in the words of Qohelet(Ecclesiastes) in the Old Testament. For example, she knew that art meant nothing in labor. At the same time, she talks about clocks and artists. She held that a made clock can work without love, but created art cannot work without love. Why did she define such a thing as ‘what the laborer needs more than bread is beauty and poetry’?  Even if we were to write out an outgrowth of this as a logic as a definition, it would be difficult to delve into the labor of the time and write it out. One commentary on ‘labor’ explained it in Hayao Miyazaki’s ‘Spirited Away’, but if that is to be used as an analogy, it fails to convey the suffering and weight of labor. Indeed, even if the protagonist who lost his name in that worldview, the dragon god having lost his memory, and the otherworldly beings who follow him obediently represent the structure of labor, nevertheless, labor is completely meaningless in allegory and structural understanding. You cannot catch up with Weil’s philosophy unless you are actually exhausted by labor and conscious of death by labor. The cartoon analogy is a poor outgrowth for the students who are the target of this lecture because they cannot understand the suffering of labor, so they have little outgrowth to formulate logic. As a result, students try to end up with a ‘mind set‘ about labor. Most believe that happiness as a laborer is poetry and beauty, depending on how you ‘mind set’. As a result, It is just an empty theory on the table and something else entirely. To know Weil is to know that hard labor means that poetry, beauty or even faith becomes utterly meaningless. One must strike this reality into one’s heart and suffer that one is wasting one’s time. In modern times, these still seem to make sense through ‘peace of mind’. That would be the explanation of this animation. The students are satisfied with the idea that labor makes sense if they change the way they look at the outside world and the other world and use philosophical terms to describe them. If you can live well enough to go to university in modern Japan, it is unlikely that you will experience the labor Weil describes. As barriers to understanding Simone Weil, one is the suffering of labor, the second is suffering with limitations, and the third is suffering through faith, is important. Without knowing these three things, one may perceive something in Weil’s poetic sentiment and follow it later with logic. I was one of them, and that may be what she calls an overlap of coincidences. That is why, by the time I was over the age of Weil’s death, I left for a time because it even seemed to me that these philosophies were only heading towards death, just as she was heading towards guest death.


Even if one decides that “it is beautiful”, poetry and beauty ask for emotion and heart, and it is difficult to express them and to appeal to them with logic. The same applies to pain and unhappiness. Unhappiness is a great mystery in life. One cannot accept the idea of this misfortune, of abandoning the imagination that you are at the center of the world, of acknowledging that the real center is outside the world, that we are a ‘point’. Descartes’ ‘I think, therefore I am’ should not be left behind in everyday life. Sartre refuted it, but it is still incomplete. So much so that the I and consciousness must not be separated. Clerics such as Father Perrin, with whom she interacted, make sense of such misfortunes. Because that is their job, They seldom look back on whether or not Jesus really felt unhappy. Jesus was the Son of God, but as a man he studied the Old Testament. Before his execution, the Son of God cried out “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”, Psalm 22. If Jesus was God, he would not have originally suffered. Jesus suffered as a human being. Suffering and misery are enigmatic for people, just as Jesus’ suffering is a beautiful story. Even today, people’s unhappiness is swelling day by day, although the world is full of measures and words that could solve their misery.

Many people still think today that Weil is not a philosopher, but for those who understand theology and faith, it was philosophical. Why is that, because she phenomenologically Epoché what people of faith cannot always erase or stop, ‘pray thinking there is no God‘ She did not flirt with religious people in the Caillet.

Religious people admonish Jesus to bear the suffering of labor, but Weil did not. Keeping philosophical questions and answers to religious understandings impoverishes the human mind to the extreme. From a religious perspective, there is even a saying, “Be a fisherman rather than a philosopher”. Wisdom is a condition for becoming poor. 【Proverbs28:11】If the saint’s condition is to perform miracles, the philosopher expects miracles but excludes them himself. That is the purification of knowledge. That purification may be the only way to realize one’s true nature. However, we do not know if that essence is something that can cross over into the world. In fact, she died because she refused treatment. Although contemporary ethics cannot touch on it, Weil’s focus on the ‘labor’ can be said to be neighborly love. She was in the same position as the poor, as was Jesus. She did not ridicule the poor laborer.

In 1937, Simone Weil, who had also become a poet enough to have Paul Valéry write a review of her books, also wrote about art. She loved Jesus so much that she was never unaware that he had descended into Hades. She descended as in ‘Gravity and Grace’.

Simone Weil used the example of Andromaque to show that tragedy is what people will not listen to unless it is represented by a creation, but she did leave a written record of her labor. If she had not died at the young age of 34, I don’t know if this fact would have been created, but that ‘Coincidence’ record of her labor is something that has to be experienced to be understood, just as there are deaths from overwork and suicides even today. Few students or professors are aware of the cruelty of her record. I was one of them. We can only be vaguely aware of the toil. I immediately play it on the basis of my own faith and experience. Not so much that it is a ‘sin’, but while I am unaware of labor, even that seems like beautiful poetry. For the sick, there were nightingales, but for the laborer, every artist makes a beautiful story. That is just raising people who can read books, but only such people try to be the voice of people’s labor.

Yet, she was still waiting for a miracle for the weak. As a seeker, she would read the Bible into her mind.She wrote like a philosophical thinker, organizing the mysteries in philosophical reflections and thinkers. about it I often asked myself what she kept doing it for.  She also became ill and poor again in her later years. Despairing too, she understood her gifts. She was estranged from her destiny and was constantly fighting against it. Maybe she waited for a miracle to figure out what she could write. For example, as manifested in her interpretation of Prometheus and Grimm’s fairy tales, she did not touch the deus ex machina – the mechanical god. That is not the same as Aristotle, who was in denial. She was choosing a god or destiny to reach out to suffering. She was informing despair so that miracles would happen to the laborer and so that the artist would invoke the god of mechanical contraptions. Despair is the stripping away of all hope. Despair is not something that comes. Sometimes others feel differently from you. Hopelessness is the stripping away of expectations in order to fall into despair yourself. St Cassilda was carrying food for the Christians, who were heretics at the time, when she was stopped by her vassals and the king and told to show them the food she had hidden. If the food was found, the death penalty awaited her, but God turned the food into roses. Simone Weil’s miracle for the laborer in waiting, in my opinion, is this. She epokayed(epokhế) God as a philosophy, but she assumed the world was God.

Like Casilda’s stripped cloak, after all hopes and expectations were stripped away, the prayer was indeed pure.


Jesus was the closest to the Father, and misfortune came to him. Those who understand know that to be close to the Mystery is most unfortunate. Whether it is just inorganic unhappiness or unhappiness due to the Mystery. When I was a seeker, I believed that the unhappiness at the time was due to the mystery. Not by hope. My faith began with misfortune. I had a desire to believe and a doubt whether souls are really equal. Unspeakable and difficult-to-surface thoughts were stirring me. The objections of the world were constant: the feeble believe in mysteries.

Light enters the eye with a single blink of an eye. Nevertheless, there are days when it does not illuminate the heart. Those who write with words begin by struggling with words they cannot communicate to express the light that transcends wisdom. Just as a musician cannot separate himself from sound, what he expresses in words cannot separate himself from words. Just as music is said to be incomprehensible, words cannot be understood, they need to be understood in the heart. How to call upon the heart is always a struggle as well. From such despair we must write down real miracles, so that light may shine on the mysteries of misery.

I think she has managed to turn it into a teaching guide so that we can get there.

Will she be a philosopher, a thinker or a seeker? She is treated as rootless by an undefined reputation. So, We have forgotten. That she was a teacher.

She was the ‘teacher’.

I could find her as a real person, a ‘teacher’. As an‟poètes”

Jesus’ Gospel walk is full of unnamed poor people. The labor she experienced is the embodiment of these unnamed people. Jesus stands in suffering outside the church.

Jesus was a laborer.


The overview will be updated in due course.→

シモーヌ・ヴェイユ 「労働者への美と詩」

Simone Weil in Marseilles, early 1940s















































Casilda of Toledo – English

Cuando Casilda desplegó el manto, cayeronmuchas rosas.

When Casilda unfolded her cloak, many roses dropped from it.

‘Toledo’, located in central Spain, was a crossroads of Judaism, Islam and Christianity. It was a city at the crossroads of Judaism, Islam and Christianity. Famous as the favorite of the painter El Greco, it became the capital of the Visigoths in the 6th century, and from the 8th to the 11th century, during the reign of Fernando I, Toledo was under the rule of Muslim powers. The Moroccan king, Casilda of Almamun, was polite and kind-hearted, and carried food to the Christians his father had captured as prisoners of war. Casilda means ‘singing’ in Arabic, and she was kind to the captives, making a beautiful white rose bloom from a bad stem and extending the seeds of faith. Her retainers, who did not take it well, informed the king that they were going to execute Casilda.

The king loved his daughter, but he had no choice but to execute her after such an incident. When the retainer and the king pursued inside the cloak of Casilda, by God’s arrangement, the food that Casilda had hidden turned into white roses. She was acquitted of any blame.

Sacrifice, a self-sacrifice, and Deus Ex Machina, a mechanical god who casts a stone in a stifling situation. Casilda’s endgame can be described as deus ex machina. Self-sacrifice to gain an advantage exists in the world of chess, but Aristotle rejects the mechanistic god. I find it interesting that even in the seemingly inorganic world of chess, a world of logic, miracles happen. If you only play on the defensive, you will never make any progress, and pieces will always be taken. The value of the pieces constantly fluctuates, they attack, watch each other and choke. Every time a piece is taken in this context, it is analyzed to see if it is just a blunder or sacrificed. The game is constantly subjected to uncertainty, and sacrifice is established from the results.

The Christian self-sacrifice seems to be a measure, an ‘accident’ that represents to the invisible God. Does it include love? The only way to find out what God wants is to read the Bible in slowly and carefully. And above all, Jesus is only full of parables, and his stories must be replaced by our everyday life for us to consider. The words of Jesus must be lived in everyday life when faced with problems that are universally the same, even though Toledo and society changed in those days.

The Christian love, the kindness of Casilda, can be regarded as religious, but it is also the inherent goodness of human beings. Of course, some people did not show that goodness. She is unable to get prisoners out of prison. They carry food, although without consequence. Does that kindness, which does not leave the hungry behind, give strength to the misfortune of being a prisoner of war? On its own, Casilda was doomed to be executed as a traitor. However, We

 knows that miracles do not happen in everyday life.

Still, I want to stay awake to the goodness, to the love of God, because the breakout of miracles is indeed something that is always there.

Always that what we see and what we have in front of us is not everything.

Casilda of Toledo – Japanese

the miracle of the Roses

Cuando Casilda desplegó el manto, cayeronmuchas rosas.





 自己犠牲であるサクリファイスと息詰まった状況に一石を投じる機械仕掛けの神、デウス・エクス・マキナ。【deus ex machina】カシルダの終盤はデウスエクスマキナである。自分が優位になるための自己犠牲というものは、チェスの世界でも存在しているが、アリストテレスは機械仕掛けの神を否定している。私は無機質に思えるチェスの世界という論理の世界でも、奇跡が起きることが面白いと思っている。守りばかりでは一向に進まず、必ず駒というものは取られる。駒の価値は常に変動し、駒は攻めたり、お互いを監視したり、息詰まる。その中で駒が取られる度に、ただの失策かサクリファイスか分析が入る。常に不確定要素にかけ続け、結果からサクリファイスは確立する。






Matthew 13 English

And that [same] day Jesus went out from the house and sat down by the sea.

 And great crowds were gathered together to him, so that going on board ship himself he sat down, and the whole crowd stood on the shore.

 And he spoke to them many things in parables, saying, Behold, the sower went out to sow:

 and as he sowed, some [grains] fell along the way, and the birds came and devoured them;

 and others fell upon the rocky places where they had not much earth, and immediately they sprang up out of [the ground] because of not having [any] depth of earth,

 but when the sun rose they were burned up, and because of not having [any] root were dried up;

and others fell upon the thorns, and the thorns grew up and choked them;

and others fell upon the good ground, and produced fruit, one a hundred, one sixty, and one thirty.

He that has ears, let him hear.

Matthew 13:1~9

Western philosophy and Greek mythology had the sea as ‘Mother Sea’, but also the opposite, as something which drowns and is unsuccessful. No land seed can grow on the sea, but I thought it made sense that Jesus was talking about seeds on the boat. Seeds are the possibility of a person’s faith in Jesus, but seeds that are scattered and falling, do not choose the place, the good earth or the bad land: Birds come and eat it, it germinates where the ground is not deep, but withers, or if it falls down a thorny path, it is blocked. We don’t know where the land is where the seed will grow and It must know that it can wither along the way. This passage became the heart of my Christian transmission because it was the lecture when I attended my first church mass.

In the Old Testament, there are stories of Joseph, who receives revelations in dreams, and Daniel the interpretation of dreams, and in the Old Testament, dreams were also revelations from God. I visited the church for the first time, with Daniel the dreamer in the book of Daniel being my favorite. Then I came across this New Testament chapter 13. Since the birth of Jesus, God no longer appears in people’s dreams. Instead, Jesus is the Lord, and the ‘parables’ of the Father unfold. Usually there is no commentary in the Mass as to whether the story has been told on the sea, and this time there is no criticism.

I think the reason I can talk about the sea is that I’m an evangelist, not an ecclesiastic. Thus, as a novelist and evangelist, I took from that passage to the sea. In Genesis, the waters existed before God was created, the world was inundated by Noah’s ark, and the sea was still there when Jesus was there. And in the first verse of chapter 21, that represents the New World in the Apocalypse, ‘there will be no sea’. This new world of no sea is beyond human understanding for us. It is an illusion and we don’t know when we will see it, but now we think of it as land, the human heart is like the sea. This is metaphorical and suggestive, but we do not know the conditions under which the seed will grow. It may sprout, but it may wither and die. Unfortunately, that is also the case with my own heart, which speaks of the Bible. Clergy cannot speak of this possibility, but because I am a writer, I can speak of the reality of withering and death. I had thought that the evangelist would go to the secular world, where a clergyman, for example, a priest, cannot go down. That is exactly why evangelists go outside the Church without trying to carefully select the best land. It is like Simone Weil’s policy, which has not been baptized.

Matthew’s Gospel is said to have been written by the evangelist Matthew. Historically, in the process of the Gospel being produced, there was persecution and oppression in Rome of those who became Christians. They were carefully selected and produced in the process, but it is certain that Jesus Christ himself existed, and the Western calendar was made to Jesus’ standards. Research has led historians and religious scholars to disagree on whether the various miracles performed by Jesus were true or not. The best part of the Gospels is that there is ‘love’, equality, and forgiveness in what they tried to write down in the face of oppression.

Matthew’s Gospel reflects Jesus as (i) of David’s lineage, (ii) the new Moses, and (iii) God with us (Immanuel). Jesus is like Moses. He comes out of Egypt, is baptized in the Jordan River, spends 40 days in the wilderness and preaches the Law on the mountain. It is also stated in Matthew’s Gospel that Jesus is more than Moses. Jesus invited him to teach that even those who are strict in their religion are not necessarily competent people, the poor and weak are also included, and that rather than just being strict with authority and religion, they will stumble. Sowing seeds is thus a good land, where we cannot choose.

Putting possibilities into the hearts of sinners and various human beings, not just the wise of the world, is like throwing a land seed into the sea. It is such a challenge to uncertainty. We are not certain what the conditions are for a seed to grow. For that matter, there is no mention of the limitation ‘love’. In the Christian world, most plants have a divine symbolism, but the lilies, the clock grass, the roses, the olives, the grapes, and the poisonous wheat and the weeds probably also have a blooming meaning. We ask whether the conditions for seeds to grow are the light of dawn, the pull of the moon to attract them, the sunlight hot enough to dry the land, the cold of winter to rest the plants, the dreams of the night, or how the human heart grows in the ‘four seasons’ of life.

Living is not limited to the time we are conscious. We share time together as long as we live, even when we are unconscious in a dream. Even when a time to tear and a time to mend,

    a time to be silent and a time to speak, a time to love and a time to hate,( Ecclesiastes, chapter 3), and even when we know freedom from such suffering, suffering is born again, and even in peace, living is also ‘waiting’. We are waiting for the time to sprout, for the time to wither, for the time to come. With regard to waiting, uncertain events can move the inner world, as in Soseki’s Natsume Ten Nights of Dreams, which has nothing to do with Christian culture.  The first night of the Ten Dreaming Nights is illusion and dreaming, speculation does not even attempt to seek order. Dreaming time has no predominance of ‘arising’ or ‘disappearing’, and is perhaps not a Hegelian intuited generation. In the stage, the woman loses her breath and says to the man, ‘I’m going to be dead’. At last, the woman dies, and the man keeps waiting. The man waits, for a long time and begins to wonder if the woman has not deceived him, but a lily blooms and kisses the man. Only a dream story, but the transformation of the breathless woman into a lily is Kairos, which appears even in the randomness of a dream.

We live in the normal quantifiable time of the ‘Chronos’. We find meaning in the unmeasurable ‘Kairos’ that breaks through that Chronos. When Jesus was born, when a miracle happened, when a flower bloomed, the day a child was born, the day we thought it was beautiful – these are the breakthroughs of the Kronos that connect the inner and outer worlds. The seed of the Word germinates and grows out of Man. It is not always in good land, with excellent conditions. And why is it necessary for the Word to grow?  Have we ever thought about that?  We live in the normal quantifiable time of the ‘Chronos’. We find meaning in the unmeasurable ‘Kairos’ that breaks through that Chronos. When Jesus was born, when a miracle happened, when a flower bloomed, the day a child was born, the day we thought it was beautiful – these are the breakthroughs of the Kronos that connect the inner and outer worlds. The seed of the Word sprouts and grows out of sight of man. It is not always in good land, with excellent conditions. And why is it necessary for the Word to grow? Have we ever thought about that? People sleeping on the streets, people being abused, unforeseen accidents, people involved in incidents, disasters, life and death choices being made, the

The seeds are sown in the internal experience of your inescapable emotional ‘moment‘ or ‘eternity‘.

The recording of ‘Ten Dreaming Nights’ was about to end for a reason halfway through. I knew Matthew 13 very well and never once asked him, a Buddhist, to read the Bible. And he said he wouldn’t read it either. And I knew that for him, with his axis of Buddhism, he was like a lotus flower, blooming on the water. Not on land, I thought of him as a flower on the water. ‘A lotus grows in the mud’ I loved his holiness, I had never felt my superiority to him, who could chant long prayers and long sutras beautifully, which even Christian get exhausted.

I loved his holiness, I had never felt my superiority to him, who could chant long prayers and long sutras beautifully, which even Christian get exhausted by. Even without us, the masterpiece will be recited by someone else. Originally, they did it in a place where the land was not certain, like filling up the sea. As I was getting up in the morning after listening to the last recording of Ten Dreaming Nights, he told me that he had seen a video of the Gospel of Matthew. I could have refused, but how could I refuse to judge him in his internal experience?

We won’t get an answer to that today: Besides, this story doesn’t stop with him, but I grew up.

If the personality is not as ideal, if it cannot be reconciled, it will divide. There are many clergy and lay people who would say so simply, “Jesus is kind.” People love personalities they don’t even know, be they historical figures or celebrities. By itself, it is incomplete for the Word to be lived. We know very well that there are limits to loving only personalities. That is why we are divided by a little disappointment in the other person. And yet Jesus Christ freed various weak people and sinners. Thus, it is not limited to personality, and not confined to its narrow scope it is not personality, but ‘love’. But love requires personality. This contradiction – so much piled up metaphysics – disappears and dissolves into ‘everyday life’. I cannot deny the day when I too live ‘everyday life’ rather than the Bible. This is why it is important to live in time and wait for the right moment.  For a beautiful rose, the smell of bitter earth is essential. Whether it is the cement garden that blooms unseen or the ivy that wraps around the dwelling, I do not know how the seeds grow. Looking back, I reflect on how plants grow differently, maintaining the golden ratio and the order of the number of leaves and petals, but not in the same way. It is not certain how the quote I gave him will live on in his life.

In my writing, silent reading was the only thing that moved my imaginary world. My mother was dyslexic. I took books away from my mother because I didn’t want to do my school homework on ‘my mother’s reading’. The lies started there and my mother said she was a good reader. I found myself reading alone.

In my writing, silent reading was the only thing that moved my imaginary world. My mother was dyslexic. I took books away from my mother because I didn’t want to do my school homework on ‘my mother’s reading’. The lies started there and my mother said she was a good reader. I found myself reading alone. A Canadian exchange student taught me English. I loved the sense of language, but I never loved the sound of Japanese. Finally I came to love it through his tone voice. That is why I have been waiting for my favorite work to become a sound, to become an embodiment, and that is what I have been waiting for.

Even if you don’t understand me today; The hearts of those who live on land are as deep as the sea.

A long time ago, I was learning from a Clergyman who I wanted to become an evangelist. He was certainly not a man with a particularly distinctive set of traits. if he was there, he would say ,
“I’ m alone again”

Yet I knew that he would say, in such a situation.
‘Now you are not alone.’

A very simple word, that little thing that people are waiting for. To be able to notice that.

It has hidden potential and Praying that you will blossom on land.

Let anyone with ears “Listen”

God bless him too.


A long time ago, I was learning from a Clergyman who I wanted to become an evangelist. He was certainly not a man with a particularly distinctive set of traits. if he was there, he would say ,
“I’ m alone again”

Yet I knew that he would say, in such a situation.
‘Now you are not alone.’

A very simple word, that little thing that people are waiting for. To be able to notice that.

Matthew 13 was treated in my own iconograph. We don’t know how the seed, the Word of God, will grow. The teaching is that we cannot choose the land where we sow the seed, but people like me, who are not missionaries, focus on what I preached on the boat. The sea was originally considered both a Greek myth and ‘barren’. A critique of his talk about land on top of that.

My reader is a Buddhist, but this month he said he would read the Bible to me. I decided to let him read it, despite the many objections around him. What does it mean for the Word to grow? From a barren sea of human thought to a fruitful land. I do not encourage conversion, and the content touches on the difference between an evangelist and a missionary. However, because of privacy, he is a Buddhist and the details of the clergyman are not mentioned, which makes it easy to mix up the stories this time, but they are connected and can be read.


その日、イエスは家を出て、湖のほとりに座っておられた。 すると、大勢の群衆がそばに集まって来たので、イエスは舟に乗って腰を下ろされた。群衆は皆岸辺に立っていた。 イエスはたとえを用いて彼らに多くのことを語られた。「種を蒔く人が種蒔きに出て行った。 蒔いている間に、ある種は道端に落ち、鳥が来て食べてしまった。 ほかの種は、石だらけで土の少ない所に落ち、そこは土が浅いのですぐ芽を出した。 しかし、日が昇ると焼けて、根がないために枯れてしまった。 ほかの種は茨の間に落ち、茨が伸びてそれをふさいでしまった。 ところが、ほかの種は、良い土地に落ち、実を結んで、あるものは百倍、あるものは六十倍、あるものは三十倍にもなった。 耳のある者は聞きなさい。






 マタイの福音書はイエスを①ダビデの血筋 ②新しいモーセ ③共にいる神(インマニエル)としている。イエスはモーセと似ている。エジプトから出てきて、ヨルダン川で洗礼を受け、荒野に40日間過ごし、律法を山で説教する。イエスはモーセ以上という記載もマタイの福音書に書かれてある。イエスが招きいれたのは、宗教に厳格な人間でも有能な人間とは限らず、貧しい人、弱者も入れられ、むしろ権威や宗教に厳格なだけだとつまずいてしまう、という教えがある。種まきとは、このように良い土地というのは私達が選べないところにある。世の賢い人に限らず、罪人や様々な人間の心に可能性を込めることは、それこそ海に陸の種を投げ込むようなことである。それぐらい不確定への挑戦でもある。


生きるとは意識がある時間に限ったことではない。夢の中で意識を失った時も、生きている限り時間を共にする。争う時、和解する時、愛する時、(コレヘトの言葉3章)と言いながらも、そしてそのような苦しみからの解放を知りながらも、また苦しみが生まれ、平穏の中でも、生きるとは「待つこと」でもある。私達は芽吹く時、枯れる時、時を待っている。待つということに関して、キリスト教文化と関係無い夏目漱石の「夢十夜」のように不確かな事象が内面世界を動かしていくこともある。 夢十夜の第一夜は幻想と夢想、思惑は秩序を求めようともしていない。夢の中の時間は「発生」も「消滅」も優位性を持たず、ヘーゲル的直観された生成とも言い切れない。その中で情景の中で女が息絶え絶えとなって、男に「もう死にますから」という。やがて女は死んでしまって男が待ち続ける。男は長らく待って「女に騙されたのではないのだろうか」と、疑い始めるが百合の花が咲いて男に接吻をする。ただの夢物語だが、息絶え絶えになった女が百合の花に変わる、その変容は夢という無作為の中でも現れた時熟である。

















The Tree of Life (English) 

“Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation?
 Tell me, if you understand/ while the morning stars sang together
    and all the angels[a] shouted for joy?
Job 38:4~7


2011 film The film begins with a quote from the Book of Job, which refers to God-given suffering. The protagonist, Jack, has grown up and had a successful life, but on the anniversary of his brother’s death in the war, he looks back to his own childhood, 1950. A strict father, a kind mother, whether to live a worldly life or leave it to God’s grace.


“When did you first touch my heart? “

I find myself saying the word world. When were we conscious of our ego and when were we conscious of God? The language of the book of the Bible attempts to take root in the nobility on a daily basis. For example, even Christians can choose their words biblically, conscious of the words of love, of the joy of birth and of the day on which they touched the world, or they can speak in modern terms, even without realizing it. Nevertheless, What has become the foundation of our sensitivity becomes Christian although we are not consciously aware of it. It is easy to match the words and values of the Bible over a long period of time, as they are latent in our daily lives. If you study the history of philosophy, including Western literature, you will know that Augustine put his object together in a philosophical way to God.( In Japan, the pursuit of bliss and spiritual freedom, which are also guaranteed in Japan, was at the origin of Christian values) We also have Christian values in our hands in this manner, without being aware of them. But we rarely get a chance to make contact with God’s Word. The film dynamically shows the world and the open air against the background of the evolution of times of a distant American family. Nature is celebrated, as in the Old Testament, but the tiny family world is irreplaceable.

In 1950, during the childhood years of the protagonist Jack O’Brien, the family reflected the conservative thinking of the Cold War period. But they were not dictated to by anyone.

but, as we grow up, Jack’s America is a place of skyscrapers, modern architectural homes, to which we feel a feeling of familiarity. This is because it closely resembles the cities we are witnessing. The family image was also, as the film begins, originally chosen by two persons who loved one another and created a family. And yet, if you show a strict father, a kind mother in neat clothes and a neighborhood woman of color, they settle into the structuralism of the ‘1950s’ era. The times are created by man, and if his work is freedom or stagnation, Considering this question, Or in philosophy, is it ‘structuralism’, the idea that what we think is unconsciously selected by our social systems? it is not surprising why the opening quotation was from the Old Testament book by Job. (Jack O’Brien for short: JOB)

Christianity is also often misunderstood, especially today, but the organization of Christianity does not directly determine one’s life. (Principle) Being a serious man, God gave Job all sorts of hardships. The story is about God answering Job’s questions. The meaning of this quotation from Job, about what controls the mind and makes it free, is to make us aware of the outer limits of those human creations. The exuberant natural beauty always present in the Old Testament stands for the very Father of Jesus in the New Testament: Jesus is also studying the Old Testament. When the mother in the film pointing to the sky and saying “That’s where God live”, it is the beginning of making the child aware of God, but is it the beginning of allegiance or a compass? To whom have we pledged our allegiance?  What about our compass? 

Some days the abode of God in the sky, where his mother taught him, is beautiful, and some days it is out of sight. God can give and God can take, and the remembrance that is with Job is no longer the time he had with his brother who was alive. It is a remembrance after the death of his brother. Why was the father so strict with his eldest son, the protagonist, it begins with the story of his father’s desire to become a musician. As a devout Christian, he never became a musician, preferring to work in a factory. His father was not proud of him and was rather stern with his eldest son, Jack, not wanting him to resemble him: Jack did what his dad said and was mature. While his father is away on business trip, he finds a brief rest with his sweet mother and a sense of freedom, But the neglect of his father’s absence brings Jack to turn slowly to delinquency. When his father returned from a business trip, Jack was rebellious.

Over time, the children grew up, only to receive news of their brother’s death in the war.

Research into the Vietnam War draft suggests that until 1975, conscription was by lottery. The eldest son, in contrast to his younger brother who passed away as a result of the lottery, became a winning adult, following in his father’s footsteps. With the details of how it happened, the film comes to the sea imagined by a spirit world that seems to be self-healing.

Is the father, who gives and takes away, like the God of the Old Testament? and the kind mother like the Virgin Mary? and yet where is Jesus, the savior Jesus is absent in this film.

Christianity is also often misunderstood, especially today, but the organization of Christianity does not directly determine one’s life. (Principle) Being a serious man, God gave Job all sorts of hardships. The story is about God answering Job’s questions. The meaning of this quotation from Job, about what controls the mind and makes it free, is to make us aware of the outer limits of those human creations. The exuberant natural beauty always present in the Old Testament stands for the very Father of Jesus in the New Testament: Jesus is also studying the Old Testament. When the mother in the film pointing to the sky and saying “That’s where God live”, it is the beginning of making the child aware of God, but is it the beginning of allegiance or a compass? To whom have we pledged our allegiance?  What about our compass? 

Some days the abode of God in the sky, where his mother taught him, is beautiful, and some days it is out of sight. God can give and God can take, and the remembrance that is with Job is no longer the time he had with his brother who was alive. It is a remembrance after the death of his brother. Why was the father so strict with his eldest son, the protagonist, it begins with the story of his father’s desire to become a musician. As a devout Christian, he never became a musician, preferring to work in a factory. His father was not proud of him and was rather stern with his eldest son, Jack, not wanting him to resemble him: Jack did what his dad said and was mature. While his father is away on business trip, he finds a brief rest with his sweet mother and a sense of freedom, But the neglect of his father’s absence brings Jack to turn slowly to delinquency. When his father returned from a business trip, Jack was rebellious.

Over time, the children grew up, only to receive news of their brother’s death in the war.

Research into the Vietnam War draft suggests that until 1975, conscription was by lottery. The eldest son, in contrast to his younger brother who passed away as a result of the lottery, became a winning adult, following in his father’s footsteps. With the details of how it happened, the film comes to the sea imagined by a spirit world that seems to be self-healing.

Is the father, who gives and takes away, like the God of the Old Testament? and the kind mother like the Virgin Mary? and yet where is Jesus, the savior Jesus is absent in this film.

My interpretation as a Christian is that the film portrayed Jesus’ absence. A celebrated absence from Jesus is the three days before his resurrection after the crucifixion, but there is also a story in the Gospel of Mark, for example, of a master who goes on a journey. The film repeatedly turned our attention from the inside to the outside, and the trick was to turn our awareness towards the ‘absence’. Early in the story, Peter Rabbit’s father goes to Mr McGregor’s house, where he is later killed. Next is the father’s absence on a business trip.

Next is the father’s business trip. The final would be his brother’s conscription. The absence by crucifixion is extraordinary, but the absence of Mark’s Gospel fits into everyday life. In Mark 13:32-37, Jesus says that a person who leaves his house to go on a journey should assign the servants He assigned them tasks, gave them responsibilities and told the ‘gatekeepers’ to stay awake. To be able to open the door when the messiah returns.

The film is based on the director’s own experience, his brother committed suicide (research 2022) I did not know this at the time of the film’s release in 2011, but when I looked it up recently, I heard the real story was his brother’s suicide, which seemed to make sense. The absence of Jesus (the Messiah) is a sign of this, and for the person concerned, it is an illusion that their faith has disappeared, but they have realized that this is not the case and that the sentiment is always Jesus who has gone on a journey. Nobody thinks that hope is on a trip when they are disappointed: Usually we see it as a loss of hope.

Having changed suicide to war death, the hatred of the father appears to be a transitory adolescent thing. By making these changes it seems like forgiveness to the director’s father.

There is one scene where the father admits and confesses that his educational policy was wrong, but the son, who grew up, forgives his father not to be wrong. Where did his brother’s soul go, did it go to heaven, “Why didn’t you (the Messiah) come?”, these are questions that cannot be answered easily. In the sense of creating something that cannot be settled, it celebrates the nature of the Old Testament, which is the Messiah travelling to the end of the world beyond our visibility. The reason why the Messiah’s presence was not clearly expressed is probably because the Messiah’s return is not certain.

Probably the reason he did not clearly express the presence of the Messiah is because we are not sure if he will return. Even if the noun faith becomes a verb, it cannot reveal its existence as a ‘noun’ to those who do not believe. Unless you find its existence in the other person’s mind, the messiah is in someone else’s thought. However, we are supposed to practice love as we should. That is kindness and forgiveness.

If you had to choose how to live, which one would you choose? Which life would you choose, to call the nature you witness worldly or to call it a blessing of God? Which would fulfil the heart of the real world you witness? Or which affliction would you accept? Suffering will always come no matter which you choose. When did the question definitively come to me?

At a Bible study group meeting, I was asked why I was baptized. One man replied that it was because of the miracles of Jesus. I had nothing to say. I can remember, in the middle of one of my seminars, I saw myself opening the revolving door and walking out. Looking up, all I see are skyscrapers and I lose my sense of direction. There was a scene in the movie where my dad lost his job: My father was also laid off from his company. This major restructuring of a large company was treated in a good way, as a rebirth of the company. My mother ran away from home and I had to rush to work, abandoning my dreams at the time. What did I need to know to be able to accept them, how many times the share price had increased with the sacking of my fathers?  If it was by God that I was deprived, I thought I could have it again. If it wasn’t God, I would just be deprived. But what I knew was that now God was absent. For me, too, the Messiah was absent. After a long time, however, this event has ceased to be of any importance. The major foreign companies that tormented employees of the father’s generation back then pulled out of Japan last year. My mother has also come home. Yet, for me, Jesus is always absent. Tree of Life was not a highly regarded film, even for Catholic priests. And that’s just as well, because they can’t say anything other than ‘be present’ to them. For example, “Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you.” (Matthew 7:7), the world may also need a presence that gives hope.

I have a lovely cat in my house. He understands whether a kind word or a harsh word is spoken. My mother did not believe in God. I held this child in my arms and taught him about God’s house. I never heard my mother talk about God, but I still loved her voice. I wonder if what a mother being tells her child is about God or the beautiful sky. Even in the moments of time that pass by, I have found that I too receive love and then give it again. It was not an elaborate declaration of faith that was important. It was the words I love you.――It came from the Kingdom of Heaven.


Tree of Life, a film released in 2011.

Despite being described as a Christian film, I had never seen this film rated by the Ministry.

By quoting the Book of Job, we are deprived of many things: the death of a classmate, the loss of his father’s job, the death of his brother, but there was no scene worthy of praise from God at the end of the Book of Job. It was thought to be a self-sacrificing, paisicidal film, with love as pain, a Christian peculiarity, but when I watched it again for some reason, I recognize there was no figure similar to Jesus, followed by a father, a mother like Mary, who is a symbol of God. The master of Mark’s Gospel goes on a journey, however, to the place where the master of the Gospel is not. The master of Mark’s Gospel goes on a journey, But while waiting for a person to be the ‘keeper’, so ‘the absence of Jesus’ was noticed.

In the real story, his brother committed suicide. ‘The absence of Jesus’ has been with me for a long time. But recently, hope has been travelling about absence, about whether to live in the secular or in God’s grace.

If nature or God’s grace, then the visual beauty of that nature may be the journey of Jesus, or so it seemed to me. In the real story, his brother committed suicide. ‘The absence of Jesus’ has been with me for a long time. But recently, hope has been travelling about the absence. Whether to live in the world(Nature) or in God’s grace.

If nature – God’s grace, then the visual beauty of that nature may be the journey of Jesus, or so it seemed to me. So, “stay awake.”


そのとき、夜明けの星はこぞって喜び歌い 神の子らは皆、喜びの声をあげた。





主人公のジャック・オブ・ライエン(Jack O’Brien)の過ごした少年時代の1950年、冷戦時代の保守思考が家庭に反映されていた。しかし彼等も完全に指定された制服を着るように外界から影響を受けてなったとは言い難い。それぞれ信仰を持って、独自の選択で選び取ったものだろう。それでも、大人になったジャックのアメリカは高層ビルに、近代的な建築の家、そこに私たちは親近感を湧く。それは私たちが目の当たりにしている都会に酷似しているからである。家族像も1950年代と、2000年代という構造は、映画の開始にあるように、本来は愛しあった二人が家族を作り選び取ったものだった。それなのに厳しかった父親や、清楚な服の優しい母、近所の色気のある女性、それを映し出せば「1950年」という時代の構造主義に彼等は落ち着いてしまう。時代という器は人間が作り出したもの、そこでの営みが自由なのか閉塞なのか、哲学で言えば、人間が考えることは、人間の社会システムによって無意識に選択しているという「構造主義」なのか? その問いを考えると、何故冒頭の引用が旧約聖書のヨブ記のこの箇所だったのか頷けるだろう。(主人公のJack O’Brienを略するとJOB・ヨブ)






  聖書勉強会の集まりで、何故洗礼を受けたのかという問いがあった。ある人はイエスの奇跡があったからですと答えた。私は何も話せなかった。思い返すのは、あるセミナーの最中に回転扉を開けて出ていく自分の姿だった。見上げれば高層ビルばかりが立ち並んでいて方向感覚を失う、あの日は何処にも答えはなかった。映画にもあった父親の解雇のシーンのように、私の父親も解雇された。この大企業の大規模なリストラクチャリングは、会社の再構成と良い意味で扱われた。母は出ていき、私は研究を捨てて急いで働くことになった。父親達の解雇で株価が何倍になったのか、毎晩、煙草を眠くなるまで吸っていた後ろ姿、その毎日が何だったのか、それらを受け入れられるようになるために、私は何を知らなければならないのだろう。私の家族を癒すものは何だったのだろう。もしも、奪われたのが神によるものなら、また手に入ると思った。神でなければ、ただ奪われただけになる。痛みが、神の恵みであるのなら意味があると思った。それなら耐えられるような気がしたのだ。循環してまた与えられるのだから、私は待つことが出来ると思った。けれども、知っていることは、今、救い主は不在ということだった。私にとっても、救世主は不在だったのだ。しかしこの出来事は長い時間を経て、重要なことでもなくなった。あの当時、父親世代の社員を苦しめた大手の外資が日本から去年撤退した。あの頃の苦悩は時代とともに風化する。私にとって、イエスはいつでも不在である。映画「ツリーオブライフ」はカトリックの神父にとっても、あまり評価が高い映画ではなかった。それもそうで彼等には「在る」という以外は言えないからだ。例えば、「求めなさい。そうすれば、与えられる。」( マタイによる福音書7:7)というように、希望を持たせる存在も世に必要なのだろう。











関連記事 でブログを始める.

ページ先頭へ ↑