Cahier 2024/03/14 

I. Die teure Gnade -Nachfolge

Was wäre auch Gnade, die nicht billige Gnade ist? Billige Gnade heißt Gnade als Lehre, als Prinzip, als System; heißt Sündenver-gebung als allgemeine Wahrheit, heißt Liebe Gottes als christliche Gottesidee. Wer sie bejaht, der hat schon Vergebung seiner Sünden. Die Kirche dieser Gnadenlehre ist durch sie schon der Gnade teilhaftig. In dieser Kirche findet die Welt billige Bedeckung ihrer Sünden, die sie nicht bereut und von denen frei zu werden sie erst recht nicht wünscht. Billige Gnade ist darum Leugnung des lebendigen Wortes Gottes, Leugnung der Menschwerdung des Wortes Gottes. 

・・・

Billige Gnade ist Predigt der Vergebung ohne Buße, ist Taufe ohne Gemeindezucht, ist Abend-mahl ohne Bekenntnis der Sünden, ist Absolution ohne persönliche Beichte. Billige Gnade ist Gnade ohne Nachfolge, Gnade ohne Kreuz, Gnade ohne den lebendigen, menschgewordenen Jesus Christus.

翻訳(試訳)

・安価ではない恵みとは何だろうか? それは一般的な真理としての罪の赦しを意味し、キリスト教における神の愛を意味する。この教義に賛同した者は、すでに罪の赦しを受けている。この恵みの教えよにり、教会全体がすでに恵を共有する。この教会において、世とは悔い改めることもなく、そこから解放されることを望むこともない罪によって安価な隠蔽を見出してくる。それゆえ、安価な恵みとは、生ける神の言葉を否定することであり、神の言葉の受肉を否定することである。

安価な恵みとは、悔い改めのない赦しを説き、教会の規律を伴わないバプテスマであり、罪の告白を伴わず聖餐を受けることであり、告白を伴わない赦免を受けることである。安価な恵みとは、弟子との自覚を伴わない恵みであり、十字架を伴わない恵みであり、生きて受肉されたイエス・キリストを伴わない恵みである。

Dietrich Bonhoeffer(1906年2月4日 – 1945年4月9日)

ディートリッヒ・ボンヘッファーは、1906年生まれのルター派の牧師であり、神学者であった。ナチス政権下で殆どの教会がナチス政権に協力したが、ボンヘッファーはBekennende Kirche(告白教会)など設立し、正義感を持って激しく抵抗した。彼はヒトラー暗殺に加わった容疑でフロッセンビュルク強制収容所(KZ Flossenbürg)で処刑される。今回は彼の初期の著作である「Nachfolge」(継承・The Cost of Discipleship)のI. Die teure Gnade(高価な恩寵)から抜粋したものを翻訳。

 彼の文章の特徴は比喩や修辞的なものは特に見られないが、神学的な展開だけではなく、論理的で倫理・道徳であり、啓発的でもある。ボンヘッファーは、安価な恩寵(billige Gnade)というものは、救いの言葉を軽視し、悔い改めや変化を求めることなく、単なる理論や教義として受け入れるものと解釈した。彼によれば、このような恩寵の受け取り方は、本物の恩寵ではなく、「生きた神の言葉の否定」であり、「神の言葉が人となって現れる」という教義の否定でもあると述べている。ボンヘッファーは、本物の恩寵は、単なる理論や教義ではなく、個人の心と生活を変える力を持つものでなければならないと主張する。したがって、本物の恩寵は、教義や理論を超えて、自分自身の心と生活の中で実践されるべきものであり、それによって真の変容や回心が生じると考えられている。特に山上の説教についての解釈は見どころであるが、何よりも、世間の道徳や倫理が歪んでいる最中で、何が正しいのかを見極めたところにある。現代でも教会全体で起きている不正を目の前にして「実践」を伴えるキリスト者は数少ない。

ヒトラー政権下での限界状態(Grenzfall)で「暗殺」という罪責を引き受けたことに関しては慎重に言葉を選ぶが、彼の「生ける神の言葉」(des lebendigen Wortes Gottes)についての言及は今でも感じることはあるはずだろう。

*今回はいつものカイエの断章的に翻訳し、考察したものです。不十分であることは承知ですが

ご理解の程をよろしくお願いします。

Wages or happiness (from Amartya Sen Economics).English

  1. Ⅰ.Introduction.
  2. Ⅱ. Amartya Sen and the Capability Approach
  3. Ⅲ. Keynesian economics and the Japanese economy.
  4. Ⅳ Well-being and economics
  5. last
  6. Japanese

日本語の記事は別リンク「カトリックあい」になります。(記事の最後にリンクがあります)

Ⅰ.Introduction.

On 22 February 2024, the closing price of the Nikkei Stock Average surpassed the record high of 38,915.87 yen set on 29 December 1989 at the peak of Japan’s bubble economy. Additionally, a new variant of the NISA (Nippon Individual Savings Account) was introduced in Japan. Japan’s business outlook index is at a new high after Nvidia’s strong results. There is a possibility of profit-taking selling. However, this is the start of a new era. The implementation of the new NISA policy has led me to believe that stock prices will continue to rise. This is because Japanese stocks are generally more stable than European stocks, and there are currently no concerns related to real estate, unlike during the bursting of the bubble and the collapse of Lehman Brothers. Additionally, although it is difficult to say definitively, the ongoing war may also be contributing to the positive performance of stock prices. This can be observed from the fact that many companies, who had previously commented on events such as the earthquake in eastern Japan, conflicts in the Middle East, and the war in Ukraine and Russia, have not made any statements regarding the situation in Gaza this time. It is important to note that these observations are not conspiracy theories but rather a reasonable analysis of historical stock price patterns during times of war to gain a better understanding of their impact on the market.

I am not an expert on the subject, so I will not go into detail, but if you are thinking about your future life, I think it is inevitable that you should learn to invest and think about increasing your wealth if you are going to make it in “Japan”.

It can be said that the days of building wealth with fixed-term deposits have returned. However, I decided to address this issue in this column because poverty is still a persistent problem and I wanted to reflect on it a little before criticism of those who did not successfully take advantage of this policy starts years later.

Ⅱ. Amartya Sen and the Capability Approach

Amartya Sen, an Indian economist and professor at Harvard University, has no clear connection with literature, but the economics he proposes is full of elements of liberation, freedom and the pursuit of happiness, which are also themes in literature. He is an authority on welfare economics and social choice theory, which use advanced mathematics and logic in economics, and concepts such as adaptive preference, the capability approach and ‘human security’ are sometimes taught in high school courses in Japan today. 

Sen’s interest in poverty and its impact on individuals can be traced back to his childhood experiences in India, particularly observing the devastating effects of the Bengal famine. His research led him to define poverty as the lack of basic capabilities, emphasizing that individuals should have the freedom to live a life they have reason to value.

In 1998, Sen was awarded the Nobel Prize in Economics for his contributions to welfare economics and his analysis of economic policies. Unlike earlier assumptions that focused solely on the macroeconomy, Sen argued that societal progress should be measured by the well-being and freedom of its individual members.

Sen’s emphasis on human happiness and flourishing highlights the importance of individual freedoms and self-determination in economic development. His ideas challenge the notion that a successful economy is solely determined by its sheer size or growth, stressing the significance of ensuring individual rights and capabilities.

In conclusion, while Amartya Sen’s work is primarily within the field of economics, it incorporates a broader perspective that recognizes the importance of human happiness and the freedom of individuals.

That is why various studies have been conducted on poverty. Margaret Thatcher famously stated that ‘poverty is a lack of character.’ Other studies have examined different approaches to addressing poverty, and even today, there are contrasting opinions on whether the solution lies in giving assistance or in changing our way of life.

A century ago, the writer George Orwell experienced poverty firsthand and remarked that it “crushes the future.” In his novels about the struggles of the poor, he also observed that they would often prioritize indulging in luxuries over consuming healthy vegetables.

Amartya Sen’s economics took a further step by focusing on poverty as an inability to exercise choice and initiative. One might question whether studying Sen’s economics is outdated now or if there are aspects of it that need reevaluation from an investment standpoint. However, I have chosen to examine it primarily from an ethical perspective.

Sen’s economics posits that inclusive and sustainable economic growth is achievable by not only improving economic indicators but also by promoting individual freedom and equality of opportunity. A thriving economy alone does not signify true societal success if inequality and poverty persist. Sen’s economics considers not only economic outcomes but also people’s quality of life and well-being as essential indicators of a healthy economy. Assessing the health of an economy requires a broader perspective beyond economic growth rates and rising stock prices.

Ⅲ. Keynesian economics and the Japanese economy.

The benefits of capitalism are described as efficient allocation of resources, innovation and efficiency improvements through competition, and the protection of individual freedom and property rights. It is also claimed that policies based on Keynesian economic theory during the ‘Showa’ period helped to realise the dream. One of the successful policies of this period was the use of fiscal policy. Keynes advocated the use of fiscal policy to promote economic growth and job creation through fiscal stimulus and public investment. Also important is the theory of imperfectly competitive markets. Keynes argued that when markets are not perfectly competitive, prices and wages do not fluctuate flexibly and stimulating demand has a positive effect on employment and output. Stressing the importance of active government fiscal policy and demand management to help the unemployed, Keynes proposed policies to deal with problems such as business cycles and unemployment, taking into account how the economy would function in an imperfect market environment rather than a perfectly competitive market. These included a ‘mainstay industrial policy’, major public works and infrastructure investment, increased economic growth and employment, an independent Bank of Japan and the use of effective monetary policy. In addition, manufacturing industries such as automobiles and electricity gained strength in trade policy and contributed to increased international cooperation.

On the other hand, there were drawbacks, one of which was the risk of inflation. While Keynesian economics stimulates the economy by stimulating demand, it has been criticised that this could lead to inflation in the long run. The second is the ability of the government to implement it. Keynesian economics requires active government intervention, but the government’s implementation capacity is sometimes seen as limited, making it difficult to implement effective policies.

Next, ‘communism’ refers to a political system that emphasises the role of government in solving poverty and focuses on economic and social management by the state. Communism rejects the private property system of capitalism and seeks to share the means of production and distribute resources equally. The first government of communism is the state, whereas the first principle of capitalism and Keynesian economics is the market. Communism differs from Keynesian policies in terms of economic and social structures and the division of roles. In communism, the role of the state is significant, leaving the central coordination of economic activity and the elimination of poverty to the state, whereas in Keynesian policies, while assuming a market economy, economic stability and public welfare are pursued through state intervention.

One of the reasons why capitalism, welfare, and support for the vulnerable have not worked well in Japan is the limited effectiveness of the basic principles of capitalism, such as the pursuit of profit, in addressing social problems and providing adequate welfare. This highlights the limitations of relying solely on the market as a solution. The lack of sufficient welfare and support in recent times presents a challenge that goes beyond the capabilities of the market alone, requiring solutions that extend beyond market mechanisms. Additionally, the issue of political decision-making adds complexity, as welfare and support for the vulnerable are public goods that require government intervention. Furthermore, political decision-making is often complicated by conflicting interests and values.

Ⅳ Well-being and economics

To what extent does economics take happiness into account? First of all, economics is not a discipline that is directly concerned with happiness itself. Economics is difficult to describe in many ways, but it focuses on the allocation of resources and economic activity, and studies the economic factors involved in people’s behavior and choices. Amartya Sen’s economics has brought economics to focus not only on welfare through wages, but also on other factors. Japan has a lower crime rate than other countries, and at the minimum wage level, even without education, you can live above the minimum if you do not choose to work, but this is only one aspect of the guarantee that wages provide.

Although much depends on individual subjective feelings and factors when considering happiness, the suffering caused by poverty should not be dismissed as ‘pampering’ or ‘laziness’. Sen focused on the caste system in India, but what should be done in Japan? One possible solution is to address ‘developmental disabilities’. The increase in the number of reports is said to be due to increased awareness through social media and a lower threshold for identifying the disorder. According to Toshio Kawai, professor emeritus at Kyoto University, “Before the focus on developmental disorders, there were many consultations on self-harm and overeating. This suggests a change in attitude towards mental health issues. In Japan, the need for ‘independence’ has increased compared to the Showa period. In that era, there was a greater division of social roles between men and women, expectations regarding marriage and childbearing, and an emphasis on cooperation rather than individuality. Communities thrived on subjectivity, and lifelong employment and conformity to social norms were the norm. But these dynamics are changing. Developmental disabilities show a wide range of symptoms, but a common feature is considered to be a lack of initiative.

Although the 1995 White Paper on Disability took the positive view that ‘disability is individuality’, we often confuse individuality with subjectivity. Initiative refers to an individual’s ability or tendency to have and act on their own will, beliefs and thoughts. A proactive person is able to pursue goals and express themselves according to their own values.

Individuality, on the other hand, refers to a person’s unique traits and characteristics. It is what distinguishes each person from others and plays a major role in creativity and expression. No matter how talented and brilliant an individual may be, if ‘individuality’ is stifled by social oppression and poverty, it will lead to a lack of self-reliance and even self-determination. The emphasis on subjectivity is therefore linked to Amartya Sen’s concept of capability. This is not just about treating the mind of an individual; it is about tackling the economy and society as a whole.

last

Finally.

The baptised believer is in the “apostolate of the faithful”, it is said. Spreading the Gospel in society has become a ‘vocation’ in the broadest sense, but in doing so the economy cannot be left out, not only to follow Jesus’ example of saving the poor, but also, as the Lord tells Moses, to ” Let the scales be just and the weights equal, let the dry measure be just and the liquid measure be equal. I am the Lord your God, who led you away from the land of Egypt.” (Leviticus 19:36). It is also important to link this to efforts to create a just society and to tackle poverty and inequality, using economic and other perspectives. The example of developmental disabilities is just one example, but the definition of poverty is becoming more complex as poverty is not only financial poverty but also relative poverty. But we must not be so false as to pretend that we have forgotten, as if faith would resolve everything. It is precisely the suffering that cannot be easily separated from the reward or happiness, nor easily measured or compared, that we must recognize.

If we were to end this criticism without removing the ethical aspect of the criticism, we might be rich and we might be poor. The experience would be different depending on which side of the story you think you are on. Am I poor or am I rich? However, the opposite entity may be the ‘mirror’ that we will eventually become ourselves. For example, we may be successful, but our children may be poor or disabled. We talk about our children as if they will be successful if they go to university, but they may suddenly become disabled. Suppose you now live in a beautiful house, you have acquired many skills and you have worked hard and positively. And you may be proud of yourself for having worked hard without complaining. But that doesn’t mean you can’t criticise people who complain. Because maybe the person who carried or printed the book you studied made it while complaining. There is an invisible ‘poverty and labour’ in this. I separate the words about this for the majority from the words for the few. If someone is in trouble, it may be a matter of friendship to give them a pep talk, but to speak of poverty to the majority is not something that should be done.

Unfortunately, the world is full of such ‘experts’. If you have something to pray about tonight, I hope you will pray with this in mind and think about what you should do.

Let us walk in the footsteps of Jesus, finding our own happiness even in times of adversity.

Japanese

外部リンクとなります。元々はこちらに掲載されたものを英訳したものです。

*「ウィガンの波止場への道」:正式には「失業者や貧乏人は、食料を買うとき、オレンジや人参といった身体に良いものを買って食べればよいのに「美味しい味」だけを求めてしょうもないものを購入して食べる」

(Author, original citation to be provided at a later date (after April 2024) due to house moving work.)

*1st Corinthians : 13 : 12: Now we see through a glass darkly. But then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part, but then I shall know, even as I am known.

Cahier 2024/02/19 English

La pesanteur et la grâce (Gravity and grace)Simon Weil

・Tous les mouvements naturels de l’âme sont régis par des lois analogues à celles de la pesanteur matérielle. La grâce seule fait exception.

・Il faut toujours s’attendre à ce que les choses se passent conformément à la pesanteur, sauf intervention du surnaturel.

・Deux forces règnent sur l’univers : lumière et pesanteur.

Translation

The natural movements of the soul follow laws similar to those of physical gravity, with the exception of grace.

It is always to be expected that things will happen in accordance with gravity, unless supernatural forces intervene.

The universe is governed by two forces: light and gravity.

note 1

So begins Gravity and Grace, a compilation of Simone Weil’s posthumous notebooks. She tries to explain human behaviour and interaction around the concepts of pesanteur (gravity) and grâce (grace).

She explains that the natural movements of our soul follow laws similar to the physical law of gravity. The only thing other than gravity is grace, and we should always expect things to proceed according to gravity, unless there is supernatural intervention.

Tous les mouvements naturels de l’âme sont régis par des lois analogues à celles de la pesanteur matérielle. La grâce seule fait exception.

The grammatical features of this sentence are as follows

Subject: ‘Tous les mouvements naturels de l’âme’ (all the natural movements of the mind)

Predicate: ‘sont régis par des lois analogues à celles de la pesanteur matérielle’ (governed by the same laws as physical gravity).

Auxiliary verb: ‘sont’ (to be).

Verb: ‘régis’ (to be governed).

Object: ‘des lois analogues à celles de la pesanteur matérielle’ (laws similar to those of physical gravity).

Adverb: ‘seule’ (the only one).

La grâce seule fait exception. (But only grace is an exception).

It is as though the bestowal of grace rests solely in God, the epitome of singularity.

Le Roi Lear et la pesanteur.

・Pesanteur. – D’une manière générale, ce qu’on attend des autres est déterminé par les effets de la pesanteur en nous ; ce qu’on en reçoit est déterminé par les effets de la pesanteur en eux. Parfois cela coïncide (par hasard), souvent non.

・Pourquoi est-ce que dès qu’un être humain témoigne qu’il a peu ou beaucoup besoin d’un autre, celui-ci s’éloigne ? Pesanteur.

Lear, tragédie de la pesanteur. Tout ce qu’on nomme bassesse est un phénomène de pesanteur.

D’ailleurs le terme de bassesse l’indique. L’objet d’une action et le niveau de l’énergie qui l’alimente, choses distinctes.・・・・・・

Translation

・Pesanteur. – Generally speaking, what we expect from others is determined by the effects of in us; what we receive from them is determined by the effects of gravity in them. Sometimes this coincides (by chance), but often it does not.

・Why is it that as soon as one person testifies that he needs another a little or a lot, the other person moves away? Pesanteur.

・Lear, tragedy of heavyiness. Everything that is called vileness is a phenomenon of gravity.

・Moreover, the term vileness indicates this. The object of an action and the level of energy that feeds it are different things. ・・・・・・

note2

Matthew 23:12 – says, ‘But whoever has exalted himself, shall be humbled. And whoever has humbled himself, shall be exalted.’, but here the scribes and Pharisees were sitting on Moses’ throne. They put heavy burdens on people’s shoulders, but they would not do anything themselves. Jesus told the crowd and his disciples that there was no ‘teacher’ or ‘master’ on earth, only Christ.

Simone Weil equated William Shakespeare’s King Lear with gravity. Lear asks his three sisters about the depth of their love for him. The two sisters were verbal, but the youngest, Cordelia, could not speak, but showed it from her heart. He could not forgive Cordelia, so he banished her and shared his territory with the other two who had shown him affection. Then his tragedy began. In making this superlative judgement of Lear, he was betrayed by two of his daughters and lost his soldiers through indecision.

What Lear shared with them was territory, a symbol of his wealth, but as if he had shared his organs, his fate was cast into exile. Having misjudged who to trust, Lear ends up losing Cordelia, who truly loved and saved him.

The Bible also says in Proverbs, “Whoever responds before he listens, demonstrates himself to be foolish and deserving of confusion.” (Proverbs 18:13), but also in verse 12, “The heart of a man is exalted before it is crushed and humbled before it is glorified.”, verse 15, “A prudent heart shall possess knowledge. And the ear of the wise seeks doctrine.”, not just superficial things, but a wise and enlightened mind.

The preoccupation with ”gift expaned” in Proverbs (Proverbs 18:16) is precisely what makes following Jesus a priority and warns against dependence between people: ‘Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me. And whoever loves son or daughter above me is not worthy of me.’ (Matthew 10:37). “But it is not to be this way among you. Instead, whoever would become greater shall be your minister;and whoever will be first among you shall be the servant of all.” (Mark 10:43-44).

Coincidentally, Leah said these words when she lost her soldier. “O, reason not the need: our basest beggars “Lear here questions his own reason and his material needs. This line foreshadows the beginning of King Lear’s spiritual collapse and self-reflection, forcing him to reassess his own folly and values.

Again, it is interesting to note that reviewing one’s mistakes is also accompanied by spiritual collapse, falling into what psychologists call psychological defences or a collapse of self-esteem. Catholics (and Christians in general) regard the discovery of sin as the starting point for repentance and conversion. Indeed, recent trials involving Catholics have revealed a psychological defence mechanism to avoid a collapse of self-esteem in clergy who break church law, who protest their innocence, and in lay people who beat their victims. It is as if they cannot see themselves in the mirror (now they see dimly as in a mirror: 1 Corinthians 13:12), as if love is the key to perfect knowledge and understanding, and that perfection is realised in love, but they are unwilling to see even that love. So God’s love and human sin are opposites, but in the same reflection. The art of recognising this is shown in Psalm 51, where King David confesses his sins before God and asks for forgiveness with a repentant heart. I note that in this Psalm King David expresses that he “repents with a sincere heart, looks at his sins and is honest with God in the depth of his heart”.

Jesus Christ also speaks of His teaching in Matthew 18:21-22, which calls for forgiveness to be given to sinners “not seven times, but seventy times” (Matthew 18:21-22). This teaching points to a heart attitude of looking at the sins of others and offering forgiveness.

D’ailleurs le terme de bassesse l’indique. l’objet d’une action et le niveau de l’ The act of lowering is indeed King Lear’s misjudgement, but the ‘sustenance’ of the subsequent wavering of his spirit with the realisation of his folly towards himself is the equivalent of staring into a mirror. The ‘sustenance’ of King Lear’s subsequent wavering spirit with the realisation of his own folly is equivalent to his gazing into a mirror. He was able to recognise the love of his three wives because he had recognised their love for him. (Although Cordelia is killed.)

*Est-ce que (What) Interrogative

Vulgarity and Grace.

・Le bas et le superficiel sont au même niveau. Il aime violemment mais bassement : phrase possible. Il aime profondément mais bassement : phrase impossible.

・ ––− une vertu basse est peut-être à certains égards mieux à l’épreuve des difficultés, des tentations et des malheurs qu’une vertu élevée.

・La grâce, c’est la loi du mouvement descendant.

Translation

・The base and the superficial are on the same level. He loves fiercely but basely: possible proposition. He loves deeply but basely: impossible sentence.

・A low virtue is perhaps in some respects a better proof against difficulties, temptations, and misfortunes than a high virtue.

・Grace is the law of downward motion.

note3

––une vertu basse est peut-être à certains égards mieux à l’épreuve des difficultés, des tentations et des malheurs qu’une vertu élevée ––According to Simone Weil, a lower virtue may, in certain respects, prove to be more resilient in the face of difficulties, temptations, and misfortunes than a higher virtue. She contends that actions and feelings rooted in lower-dimensional motives and emotions hold equal value. In other words, she does not diminish the significance of lower dimensions but instead embraces them as if they represent the truth.

According to Weil, the concept of ‘gravity’ (pesanteur) represents the notion of ‘lower’ behavior and emotions in humanity. She argues that these ‘lower’ aspects are a manifestation of gravity. Additionally, she asserts that both ‘low’ and ‘superficial’ are comparable in their level of significance. The pronoun ‘he’ she uses alludes to the fact that intense emotions can coexist with lowly behavior, as exemplified by characters like King Lear. Moreover, Weil contends that it is impossible to simultaneously love in both a lowly and deep manner. She does not shy away from acknowledging the impact of heaviness and vulgarity in human behavior and emotions. It is as if she is gazing into a philosophical reflection, rather than an ecclesiastical one tied to religious institutions. Weil believes that actions and feelings originating from ‘lower motives’ are of equal value to those rooted in higher dimensions.

While there are no direct stories in Christianity that parallel King Lear’s mistakes, there are teachings and warnings in Christianity regarding human judgment and deceit. One such example is the parable of the Pharisees.

In the course of Jesus’ numerous miracles, the Pharisees are portrayed as religious leaders who sought to emphasize their adherence to religious laws and principles. However, they were self-centered and proud, as their focus on external actions and beliefs lacked inner transformation and genuine love for others. Through this parable, Christianity cautions against superficial faith and self-righteous attitudes, asserting that true faith is rooted in inner transformation and compassionate love for others.

In the case of King Lear, his initial choice may have appeared to be the right one, but it ultimately proved to be a mistake. This story not only teaches us the importance of focusing on inner truth and love rather than superficial judgments and words, but it also speaks to the concept of grace, which is bestowed upon us even though we cannot defy gravity.

Gravity can be succinctly translated as the scientific term ‘Zwaartekracht’, referring to the weight of an object on Earth due to the gravitational pull exerted by the planet. It encompasses the combined force of the universal gravitational pull of Earth and its rotation. The nature of mass suggests that objects do not attract each other directly, but instead, they distort the space around them, resulting in mutual attraction. While gravity governs the entire universe, its force is inherently weak, allowing birds to soar and us to move about freely. It remains weak as long as it asserts its dominion.

Leah’s ability to feel and suffer from Cordelia’s presence was subject to the influence of this never-ending, but never overpowering, force of gravity. So, too, her love must have been intertwined with God’s love.


This profound realization from Simone Weil’s choice of ‘Gravity’ suggests that the presence of gravity is necessary for the emergence of its opposite, ‘grace’.

*This is the Cahier, but if you have any suggestions, please contact us.

Cahier 2024/02/19 Japanese

La pesanteur et la grâce (重力と恩寵)シモーヌ・ヴェイユ

・Tous les mouvements naturels de l’âme sont régis par des lois analogues à celles de la pesanteur matérielle. La grâce seule fait exception.

・Il faut toujours s’attendre à ce que les choses se passent conformément à la pesanteur, sauf intervention du surnaturel.

・Deux forces règnent sur l’univers : lumière et pesanteur.

・魂の自然な動きはすべて、物質的な重力に類似した法則に支配されている。恩寵だけは例外に排除される。

・超自然的なものが介入しない限り、私たちは常に重力に従って物事が起こることを期待しなければならない。

・宇宙には光と重力という2つの力が支配している。

memo 1

シモーヌ・ヴェイユの遺作となったノートをまとめた「重力と恩寵」の始まりはこのようになっている。彼女は、「pesanteur(重力)」と「grâce(恩寵)」という概念を軸に人間の行動や相互作用を説明しようとしている。

この文では、私たちの魂の自然な動きは、物理的な重力の法則に似た法則に従っていると述べられています。重力以外のものは、恩寵のみであり、超自然的な介入がない限り、常に重力に従って事が進むことを期待する必要がある。

この文の文法的特徴は次のとおりです:

  • 主語:「Tous les mouvements naturels de l’âme」(心の自然な動きすべて)
  • 述語:「sont régis par des lois analogues à celles de la pesanteur matérielle.」(物理的な重力と同様の法則によって統制される。)
  • 助動詞:「sont」(~である)
  • 動詞:「régis」(支配される)
  • 目的語:「des lois analogues à celles de la pesanteur matérielle」(物理的な重力と同様の法則)
  • 副詞:「seule」(唯一・唯一の人)
  • 「La grâce seule fait exception.」(ただし、恩寵のみは例外である)

まるで「恩寵」を与える存在が神という唯一性であるかのようだ。

リア王と重力

・Pesanteur. – D’une manière générale, ce qu’on attend des autres est déterminé par les effets de la pesanteur en nous ; ce qu’on en reçoit est déterminé par les effets de la pesanteur en eux. Parfois cela coïncide (par hasard), souvent non.

・Pourquoi est-ce que dès qu’un être humain témoigne qu’il a peu ou beaucoup besoin d’un autre, celui-ci s’éloigne ? Pesanteur.

Lear, tragédie de la pesanteur. Tout ce qu’on nomme bassesse est un phénomène de pesanteur.

D’ailleurs le terme de bassesse l’indique. L’objet d’une action et le niveau de l’énergie qui l’alimente, choses distinctes.・・・・・・

・重力。- 一般的に言って、私たちが他者から期待するものは、私たちの中にある重力の影響によって決まり、私たちが他者から受け取るものは、他者の中にある重力の影響によって決まる。時にはこれは(偶然に)一致することもあれば、多くの場合は一致しない。

・なぜ、ある人間が他者を、かなり必要としていると証言したとたん、その他者は離れていくのだろうか? 重力のため。

・リア王、重力の悲劇。私たちが「低さ」と呼ぶものはすべて重力の現象による。

 ・実際、”低さ “という言葉はそれを示している。行為の対象と、それを糧とするエネルギーは異なるものなのだ。(割愛)

memo2

マタイによる福音書 23:12 -に「誰でも、高ぶる者は低くされ、へりくだる者は高められる」とあるが、ここでは律法学者たちやファリサイ派の人たちが、モーセの座についていた。彼らは重いものを人の肩に乗せるが、自分たちは何もしようとしなかった。イエスは群衆と弟子たちに、「先生」や「師」というのは地上にはおらず、キリスト一人とした。

シモーヌ・ヴェイユはウィリアム・シェイクスピアの「リア王」と「重力」を同質とした。リアとは三姉妹に自分への愛情の深さを尋ねた。二人の姉妹は言葉巧みに語るが、末娘は言葉で語れず心の中で示した。彼は、三女を許さず追放し、愛情を示してくれた二人に領土を分け与えた。それからが、彼の悲劇の始まりだった。リアのこの上辺だけで判断することで、娘二人に裏切られ優柔不断で兵を失ってしまう。

リアが分け与えたのは、富の象徴とも言える「領土」であったが、それがまるで彼の臓器を分け与えたかのように、彼の運命は流浪の身へと翻弄されていく。本当に信頼すべき人を誤ってしまったリアの末路は、自分を本当に愛してくれ、救ってくれた三女であるコーデリアを失うこととなる。

聖書にも箴言で「よく聞きもせずに言葉を返す 無知も恥辱もこういう者のこと」(箴言18:13)とあるが、他にも12節、「破滅に先立つ高慢、誉れに先立つ謙遜」15節「分別ある心は知識を得、知恵のある耳は知識を求める」と、表面だけのことにとらわれず、知恵深い悟りを持っている人間によって「究極の判断」ができるとされる。

箴言にもある前途ある「貢ぎ物」とは(箴言18:16)これこそ、イエスについていくことを優先とし、人間同士の依存について警告を出している「私よりも父や母を愛する者は、私にふさわしくない」(マタイによる福音書10:37)マルコによる福音書では「あなたがたの間では、そうではない。あなたがたの中で偉くなりたい者は、皆に仕える者となり、あなた方の中で、頭になりたい者は、すべての人の僕(しもべ)になりなさい」と述べている(マルコ10:43-44)。

奇しくもリアは兵士を失った時に、このような言葉を述べている。「なんだと、必要を論ずるな。最も卑しい乞食でさえ、その貧しい持ち物の中に何かしら余分な物を所有しておるわ」リアは、ここで気分自身の理性と、物質的な必要性を問いかけている。このセリフはリア王の精神的な崩壊や自省の始まりを予示していて、彼は自らの愚かさや価値観の見直しを迫られている。

ここで、自らの過ちを見直すことは精神的な崩壊も伴うこと、心理学でいう心理的防衛機制(psychological defense mechanisms)、自己評価の崩壊(self-esteem collapse)に相当することにも陥っていることも興味深い。カトリック(キリスト教全般)は罪を見つけることは悔い改めと回心の出発点とされている。実際に、昨今のカトリック関連の訴訟によって、無実を訴える教会法違反聖職者や、被害者を叩く信徒に自己評価の崩壊を避けるがための心理的防衛機制が見受けられる。まるで自分自身を鏡を見ることが出来ないような、(今は、鏡に映して見るようにおぼろげに見ている:1コリント人への手紙13:12)愛は、完全な知識や理解を得るための鍵であり、愛の中で完全性が実現するとされているが、彼等はその愛ですら見ようとしていない。そのように、神の愛と人間の罪というのは対極でありながらも同じ鏡像にある。それを見つける術は、詩篇51篇では、ダビデ王が神の前で自分の罪を告白し、悔い改めの心で赦しを求めている。この詩篇の中で、ダビデ王は「真心で悔い、罪を見つめ、心の奥底で神に正直になります」と表現していることに私は着目する。

また、イエス・キリストも、マタイによる福音書18章21-22節で、罪人に対して「7回どころか70倍」(マタイ18:21〜22)赦しを与えることを求める教えを語っている。この教えは、相手の罪を見つめ、赦しを与える心の姿勢を示している。

D’ailleurs le terme de bassesse l’indique. L’objet d’une action et le niveau de l’énergie qui l’alimente, choses distinctes. 低めることへの行為とはリア王の誤った判断のことをさすが、その後のリア王の自分自身への愚かさへの気づきと共に精神が揺らいでいくことについてのは「糧」というのは、鏡を見つめたということに相当する。何故なら、彼は三女の愛に気づけたからだ。(但し、三女コーデリアは殺されるが)

est-ce que (What) 疑問系 

低めたものと「恩寵」

・Le bas et le superficiel sont au même niveau. Il aime violemment mais bassement : phrase possible. Il aime profondément mais bassement : phrase impossible.

・ ––− une vertu basse est peut-être à certains égards mieux à l’épreuve des difficultés, des tentations et des malheurs qu’une vertu élevée.

・La grâce, c’est la loi du mouvement descendant.

・低いものと浅いものとは、同一のレベルにある。彼は激しく愛するが、低級に。彼は深く愛しているが、低級に:とは不可能な判決だ。

・−–−恐らく低い徳の方が、高い徳よりも、様々な困難や誘惑、不幸に耐えられることもあるだろう。

・恩寵とは、下降運動の法則である。

memo3

この引用は、シモーヌ・ヴェイユが低いものと浅いものについて考えていることを示している。ここでは引用が長くなってしまうので割愛させてもらったが、––une vertu basse est peut-être à certains égards mieux à l’épreuve des difficultés, des tentations et des malheurs qu’une vertu élevée.−−彼女は、低次元の動機や感情に基づく行動や感情は、高次元のものと同じように価値があると主張している。言い換えれば、彼女は低次元のものを軽視することなく、まるで真理がそこにあるかのように汲み取っています。

ヴェイユは「重力」(Pesanteur)という概念を通じて、人間の行動や感情における“basse”「低級な」という言葉が示すものについて言及しているようだ。彼女は「低める」行動や感情は、重力の現象であると述べている。また、「低さ」と「表面的」は同じレベルにあると述べており、彼女が指す「彼」とは、リア王のように、強烈な感情を持ちながらも低俗な行動をすることがあり得ると繋がっているだろう。それと同時にヴェイユは「深さ」だけでなく「低俗に」愛することは不可能であると主張している。彼女は「鏡」を見つめるかのように、人間の行動や感情の内部に存在する重さや低俗さの影響について目を逸らすことなく、教会的(この意味では世俗的な教会を指す)ではなく哲学的な考察だと考えられる。

ヴェイユは「低級の動機」や感情に基づく行動や感情は、高次元のものと同じように価値があるとしている。

キリスト教には、リア王と同じような過ちを犯した人物の物語は「直接的」には存在しないが、ただし、キリスト教においては、人間の判断や欺瞞性に対する警告や教訓がある。たとえば、パリサイ派の人たちへの譬えがそれに当たる。

イエス・キリストが数々の奇跡を行う中で、パリサイ派は自分たちの正統性や高潔さを強調しようとする宗教指導者たちについて述べられた。彼らは自己中心的で誇り高く、外見上の行為や信仰を重視して内面的な変化や他の人々への深い愛に欠けていたからだ。この物語を通じて、キリスト教は表面的な信仰や独善的な態度を警戒し、真の信仰は内なる変化と他者への愛に基づくことを教えている。

リア王の場合も、彼の選択は一見正しく思われたかもしれないが、実際には誤った選択となってしまった。この話から私たちは、言葉の表面や外見だけで判断せず、内面の真実や愛を重視する大切さを学ぶことができるだけでなく、重力に逆らうことが出来ない中でも与えられた「恩寵」についても書かれてあるのかもしれない。

重力とは簡潔に科学的に言えばZwaartekracht の訳語で、地球上の物体が地球上の引力によって、物体の重さとなっている。地球の万有引力と「自転」による合力である。質量の本質とは、物体同士が引き寄せ合うのではなく、空間を歪めて引き寄せ合う。重力は宇宙全体を支配しているが、その力は、鳥が飛ぶように、そして私たちが飛び跳ねられるように弱い。決して、強くはない。その「重力」の支配下の中で、リアはコーデリアの存在に気づいた。その愛は、神の愛に通じたのだろう。

*これはカイエです。深くは掘り下げていませんが、何か教示があったらコメントまで。

Cahier2024/01/22 English

Simone Weil, ‘Illusions’ (Gravity and Grace).La pesanteur et la grâce

・On se porte vers une chose parce qu’on croit qu’elle est bonne, et on y reste enchaîné parce qu’elle est devenue nécessaire.

・Les choses sensibles sont réelles en tant que choses sensibles, mais irréelles en tant que biens.

・L’apparence a la plénitude de la réalité, mais en tant qu’apparence. En tant qu’autre chose qu’apparence, elle est erreur.

L’illusion concernant les choses de ce monde ne concerne pas leur existence, mais leur valeur.

L’image de la caverne se rapporte à la valeur. Nous ne possédons que des ombres d’imitations de biens. C’est aussi par rapport au bien que nous sommes captifs, enchaînés (attachement). Nous acceptons les fausses valeurs qui nous apparaissent, et quand nous croyons agir, nous sommes en réalité immobiles, car nous restons dans le même système de valeurs.

ceux qui ont nourri et vêtu le Christ ne savaient pas que c’était le Christ.

English

・We are drawn to something because we believe it is good, and we remain attached to it because it has become necessary.

・Sensible things exist as sensible things, but are unreal as goods. Images possess the fullness of reality, but only as images.

・The illusion regarding the things of this world pertains not to their existence, but to their value.

・The illusion concerning the things of this world does not concern their existence, but their value. The image of the cave is related to value. We only possess shadowy imitations of goods. It is also in relation to goodness that we are captives, bound (through attachment). We accept false values that appear to us, and when we believe we are acting, we are actually immobile, as we remain within the same system of values.

・Those who fed and clothed Christ did not know that it was Christ.

1L’apparence

L’apparence means ‘appearance’ in French, but in legal philosophy and sometimes in psychology it is translated as ‘provisional image’. While a virtuality has the integrity of reality, it can also be misleading, not only with regard to the appearance of reality, but also with regard to other objects. This may be a feeling that is not common in Japanese concepts. Although Husserl distinguished between ‘imaginative action’ and ‘fantasy’, in phenomenology Husserl provided an approach to the idea of the provisional and value. The distinction between phenomena (physical sensation) and value (provisional representation) is also mentioned in Weil’s quotation.

ceux qui ont nourri et vêtu le Christ ne savaient pas que c’était le Christ.

・Phonological beauty: in this sentence there is a balance between vowels and consonants and a sense of rhythm. For example, the phrase ‘nourri et vêtu’ feels beautiful because the sounds are delicate and echo each other.

2 ’provisional image’ versus ‘conjectural’.

Provisional image refers to an image in the mind of an object or event that has not been directly experienced in the real world, based on imagination or speculation. Assumption is an unquestioning perception distorted by subjectivity with concepts that are different from provisional images. In essence, provisional images are realistic and contain misperceptions, but they are also correctable. Assumptions, on the other hand, are often not correctable. For example, in advertising and marketing, provisional images are used to attract people and make them stick to a product or service. We need to make sure that we do not miss the real value and benefit behind individual products and services. In the area of self-development and relationships, it is also important to focus on one’s own true needs and wellbeing, rather than getting caught up in the provisional images and expectations of others.

3 ’Good’ and ‘justice’.

Weil’s declamations seem to have philosophy at their heart, even though they are poetic in nature. This quotation, for example, may be based on the ‘good’ and ‘justice’ of ‘Platonic’ philosophy. In Plato’s ‘Republic justice is attributed to the soul. I think that the image of a ‘cave’ here is undoubtedly an analogy for the cave in Plato’s ‘Republic’.

The parable describes a situation in which people are trapped in a cave and live by seeing shadows projected on the walls by a fire at the back of the cave. They believed the shadows to be real and never left the cave. However, when a person escapes from the cave and sees the outside world, he or she discovers true reality for the first time. There were concepts and things that were different from the shadows he saw in the cave, such as light, colour and shape. This person discovered new knowledge and truths and tried to communicate their existence to the others in the cave, but they were convinced of the shadow world and refused to accept the truths of the outside world. This parable represents Plato’s ideas about the acquisition of knowledge and truth. The cave symbolises the material world and sensory experience, while the shadow represents knowledge through perception. On the other hand, the world outside, as seen by the person leaving the cave, would refer to the world of ideas and metaphysical truths. Plato’s parable of the cave is a metaphor for the fact that we can only see things in their provisional image or shadow form, not in their real form. The people in the cave only see shadows projected on the walls and cannot know the true reality, so although there are ‘provisional images’ in the cave, they cannot be said to be the true existence or reality. It suggests that the world we perceive is part of reality and that there is a truth or essence beyond it. It emphasises that ‘provisional images’ exist in some sense, but that they are not a complete picture of truth or reality.

This is also an example of the fact that truth and knowledge must be obtained through reason, and that true understanding is impossible as long as we are trapped in the material world and sense experience.

In Plato’s Republic, the desire to know the truth about justice interacts with the idea of the good, which is also characteristic of the French word Nous ne possédons que des ombres d’imitations de biens. C’est aussi par rapport au bien que nous sommes captifs, enchaînés. In Bient in, it can mean ‘good’, but it can also mean ‘possession’.

For example, what does it mean when translated as ‘property’?

We are trapped in a cave whose walls reflect the shadows of our possessions. But these shadows are not real possessions, they are only imitations. Because we are trapped in these shadows, we cannot know true ownership and luxury. If we could come out of the cave, we would experience true possessions and true wealth.

Even as ‘property’ he points to our obsession with material possessions and our missing out on true happiness and abundance.

So what if we think in terms of the good, which is the correct translation?

Trapped in a cave, what we see is not the real world but shadows, which are imitations or representations of reality. Shadows reflect true reality, but are themselves incomplete, and we cannot know true reality accurately. Goodness’ becomes the knowledge and rational understanding of true reality. By going outside the cave and seeing true reality directly, we can understand and accept true goodness. However, trapped in the cave, we cannot have knowledge of the true good and remain trapped in the shadow of mere imitation.

This parable is consistent with Plato’s advocacy of an ideal state and his insistence that philosophers should play a role in pursuing the true good and communicating it to others. It also suggests that in order to gain knowledge of the true good, we need to go outside the cave and engage in self-knowledge and self-transcendence.

Continuing the section, Weil adds a passage from the biblical Gospel of Matthew, chapter 26, verse 37, where he gives him food and clothing without recognising him as Jesus. This shows the difficulty of understanding Christ’s presence and the need to open people’s spiritual eyes. By treating this account in a provisional image, Weil may have been trying to express the universal theme of people’s contact with Christ (or a divine being) but their inability to understand his presence and truth, as well as the difficulty of mystical experience.

The biblical position on ‘property’ (in money),


Matthew : 6 : 19 – 21

Do not choose to store up for yourselves treasures on earth: where rust and moth consume, and where thieves break in and steal. Instead, store up for yourselves treasures in heaven: where neither rust nor moth consumes, and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there also is your heart. 

This is not just a denial of material possessions, but a question of where the heart is. Those who gave food and clothing without knowing Jesus may have earthly possessions, heavenly treasures and ‘heart’. This is also related to Platonic ‘goodness’ and ‘justice’. As Plato wrote in the Republic, biblical ‘goodness’ and ‘justice’ do not just enrich the inner life of an individual. He believed that an individual’s goodness and justice is made up of a collection of individual goodness and justice. He taught that through the pursuit and practice of goodness and justice by individual souls, the nation as a whole can also realise goodness and justice. Reality, however, exists alongside provisional images and is difficult to put into practice. Provisional images’ are questions for the philosopher.

*This is not an explanation.

Cahier2024/01/22 Japanese

シモーヌ・ヴェイユ「幻想」(重力と恩寵)

・On se porte vers une chose parce qu’on croit qu’elle est bonne, et on y reste enchaîné parce qu’elle est devenue nécessaire.

・Les choses sensibles sont réelles en tant que choses sensibles, mais irréelles en tant que biens.

・L’apparence a la plénitude de la réalité, mais en tant qu’apparence. En tant qu’autre chose qu’apparence, elle est erreur.

L’illusion concernant les choses de ce monde ne concerne pas leur existence, mais leur valeur.

L’image de la caverne se rapporte à la valeur. Nous ne possédons que des ombres d’imitations de biens. C’est aussi par rapport au bien que nous sommes captifs, enchaînés (attachement). Nous acceptons les fausses valeurs qui nous apparaissent, et quand nous croyons agir, nous sommes en réalité immobiles, car nous restons dans le même système de valeurs.

ceux qui ont nourri et vêtu le Christ ne savaient pas que c’était le Christ.

・私たちがある一つのものに惹かれるのは、それが良いものだと信じているからであり、私たちがそれに縛られ続けるのは、それが必要になっているからである。

・感覚的なものは感覚的なものとして実在するが、善としては非現実的である。仮象は現実の完全性を持っているが、仮象としてである。

・仮象には現実の完全性がある。仮象以外のものとして、それは誤りである。

・この世のものに関する幻想は、その存在に関わるものではなく、その価値に関わるものである。洞窟のイメージは価値に関係する。私たちは善の模造品の影でしか持っていない。私たちが囚われの身であり、鎖につながれている(執着)のも、善との関係においてである。私たちは目に見える偽りの価値を受け入れ、行動しているつもりでも、実際には同じ価値体系の中にとどまっているため、身動きがとれない。

・キリストに食べ物を与え、着るものを与えた者はそれをキリストと知らなかった。

1「外観」

L’apparenceとはフランス語で「外観」と意味するが、法哲学や、心理学では仮象と訳すことがある。仮象とは現実の完全性を持つ一方で、現実の外観だけでなく他の対象に対しても誤解をもたらす可能性がある。日本語の概念ではあまり無い感覚なのかもしれない。フッサールは「想像作用」と「空想」を区別したが、フッサールは現象学において仮象や価値の考え方に関するアプローチを提供した。ヴェイユの引用の中でも現象(物理的な感覚)と価値(仮象)の区別が言及されている。

ceux qui ont nourri et vêtu le Christ ne savaient pas que c’était le Christ.

・ “ceux qui”:これは「〜をする人々」と訳され、特定の人々を指しています。

・過去の動詞形 “ont nourri” および “ont vêtu”:これらは直接翻訳すると「〜を養った」と「〜に衣服を与えた」になります。過去の形であることから、過去の出来事を表す。

・「que c’était le Christ」:これは「それがキリストであることを知らなかった」という意味です。queの後には主格である「c’était le Christ」が続く。

・音韻的な美しさ:この文では、母音と子音のバランスがあり、リズム感がある。例えば、「nourri et vêtu」のフレーズは、音の響きが繊細で響き合っていることから美しく感る。

2 「仮象」と「思い込み」の違い。

仮象とは、現実世界で直接経験したことのない物や事象を、想像や推測に基づいて頭の中でイメージすることを指す。思い込みとは、仮象と異なる概念で主観によって歪んだ認識をして疑わないこと。要するに「仮象」とは現実的に存在し、誤認はあるものの修正可能も含まれる。しかし、思い込みは修正が不可能な場合が多い。例えば、広告やマーケティングの分野では、仮象を使って人々を引き寄せ、その商品やサービスに固執させることがある。私たちは個別の商品やサービスの背後にある真の価値や利益を見逃さないようにする必要がある。また、自己啓発や人間関係の分野でも、他人の仮象や期待に捕らわれずに、自分自身の真のニーズや幸福を重視することが重要になる。

3 「善」「正義」

ヴェイユの断章は、詩のようでありながらも哲学が根底にあるように見える。例えばこの引用は、「プラトン」哲学の「善」と「正義」が元になっているのかもしれない。プラトンの「国家」では正義は魂に帰属している。ここでいう「洞窟」のイメージはプラトンの「国家」の洞窟の例えで間違えはないだろうと思う。

このたとえでは、人々が洞窟に閉じ込められ、洞窟の奥にある火によって壁に映される 影 を見て生活している状況が描かれている。彼らはその影を現実と信じ込み、洞窟から出ることはなかった。しかし、ある人物が洞窟から脱出し、外の世界を目にすると、初めて真の現実を知ることになる。そこでは、光や色、形など、洞窟の中で見た影とは異なる概念や事物が存在していた。この人物は、新たな知識や真理を見出し、洞窟の他の人々にその存在を伝えようとしたが、彼らは影の世界を信じ込んでいて、外の世界の真理を受け入れることを拒んだ。このたとえは、知識や真理の獲得についてのプラトンの考えを表している。洞窟は物質的な世界や感覚的な経験を象徴し、影は知覚による認識を意味する。一方、洞窟から出た人物が目にする外の世界は、理念界や形而上学的な真理を指すことになる。

プラトンの洞窟のたとえは、私たちが物事を現実の姿ではなく、その仮象や影の形でしか見ることができないことへの喩えである。洞窟の中にいる人々は壁に映し出された影を見ているだけであり、真の現実を知ることができないしたがって、「仮象」は洞窟の中に存在するものの、それが真の存在や現実であるとは言えない。それは、私たちが認識する世界は現実の一部であり、それ以上の真実や本質が存在することを示唆している。「仮象」はある意味では存在するが、それが真実や現実の完全な姿ではないことを強調する。

これは真理や知識は理性によって得られるべきであり、物質的な世界や感覚的な経験に囚われている限り真の理解は不可能だということの例えでもある。

プラトンの「国家」では正義についての真実を知りたい欲求を、善のイデアを通じて対話しているが、フランス語の単語の特徴もあるが、Nous ne possédons que des ombres d’imitations de biens. C’est aussi par rapport au bien que nous sommes captifs, enchaînés (attachement).でBientとは「善」という意味でもあるが「財産」という意味もある。

例えば、これを「財産」と訳する場合はどのような意味となるのか。

「私たちは洞窟の中に閉じ込められており、その壁には私たちの所有する財産の影が映し出されています。しかし、これらの影は実際の財産ではなく、ただの模倣に過ぎないのです。私たちはこれらの影に囚われているため、真の財産や贅沢を知ることができません。洞窟の外に出ることができれば、本物の財産や真の豊かさを経験することができるでしょう」

「財産」としても、私たちが物質的な所有に固執していることや、本物の幸福や豊かさを見落としていることを指摘する。

では、正解である「善」で考えたらどうなのか、

洞窟の中に閉じ込められている私たちが見ているのは、現実世界ではなく、現実の模倣や表象である影です。影は真の現実を反映していますが、それ自体は不完全であり、真の現実を正確に知ることはで機内。「善」とは、真の現実を知り、理性的に理解することになる。洞窟の外に出て真の現実を直接見ることで、私たちは真の善を理解し、受容することができる。しかし、洞窟の中に閉じ込められた状態では、私たちは真の善に関する知識を持つことはできず、単なる模倣の影に囚われたままになる。

このたとえは、プラトンが理想国家を提唱し、哲学者たちが真の善を追求し、それを他の人々にも伝える役割を果たすべきと主張していることに通じている。また、私たちが現実の善に関する知識を得るためには、洞窟の外に出て自己認識と自己超越を行う必要があることも示唆している。

断章続きではあるが、更に、ヴェイユは聖書のマタイによる福音書の26章の37節にイエスと気づかず食べ物を与えて、着るものを与えたという箇所も加えている。それは、キリストの存在を理解することの難しさや、人々の霊的な眼を開く必要性を示している。ヴェイユはこの記述を仮象の中で扱うことによって、人々がキリスト(あるいは神聖な存在)に接しているにもかかわらず、その存在や真理を理解することができないという普遍的なテーマや、神秘的な体験の難しさを表現しようとした可能性がある。

聖書の「財産」(金銭による)の位置付けは、

マタイによる福音書 6:19-21
「だから、あなたがたは地上に宝を積んではならない。そこでは、虫が食って損なったり、盗人が忍び込んで盗み出したりする。宝は天に積みなさい。そこでは、虫が食って損なうこともなく、盗人が忍び込んで盗み出すこともない。あなたの宝のあるところに、あなたの心もあるのだ」

これは、物質的な財産を否定するだけの言葉ではなく、自分の心が何処にあるのか、ということが問われている。イエスを知らずに食べ物や着るものを与えた人たちは、地上の財産と天の宝と「心」を持っていることもある。これはプラトン的な「善」と「正義」とも繋がるのである。プラトンは個人の善や正義が集まって成り立つものであると考えた。個人の魂が善や正義を追求し、実践することによって、国家全体も善や正義を実現することができると説いた。しかし、ヴェイユの話にもあるように、現実問題は「仮象」を含み、思い込んでしまう。「仮象」とは哲学者への問いなのかもしれない。

これはカイエですので、解説ではありません。

Cahier 2023/12/25 English

La pesanteur et la grâce La mal (Simone Weil)

Le faux Dieu change la souffrance en violence. Le vrai Dieu change la violence en souffrance.

“The false God turns suffering into violence. The true God turns violence into suffering”

Alors, où mettre le mal ? 

“So, where does evil belong?”

Il faut le transférer de la partie impure dans la partie pure de soi-même, le transmuant ainsi en souffrance pure. Le crime qu’on a en soi, il faut l’infliger à soi.

“It has to be transferred from the impure part to the pure part of oneself, thus transforming it into pure suffering. We must inflict the crime within us upon ourselves”

Grammar

The use of the definite article, such as ‘Le faux Dieu’ or ‘Le vrai Dieu’, refers to a specific deity.

Verbs such as ‘change’, in the direct present tense, and ‘transférer’ refer to the transfer of a thing to another place.

Verbs such as ‘change’ in the direct present ‘transférer’ indicate that the thing in question is transferred to another place.

The expression ‘de soi-même’ is used to indicate the myself, the self.

The expression ‘qu’on a en soi’ indicates the self and refers to a sin related to the aforementioned part.

The expression ‘à soi’ indicates taking action against the self.

Note:

For some reason, ‘So where does evil belong’ was of interest to me. Weil seems to speak only to his own inner ‘mystery’ and ‘imperfection’. It seems like Nietzsche’s ‘self-transcendence’, which argued that the purpose of human life is self-realisation and transcending one’s own limitations and constraints.

However, the evil in the Catholic prayer ‘Lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil’ means ‘Satan’, so Weil, although a philosopher, is influenced by Catholicism, so in this case evil includes Nietzschean evil, but is also close to the Satan positioned by Catholicism is also close to the Devil.

Here, briefly, about Satan. The etymology of the word exorcism does not mean exorcism, but is derived from the Greek word ‘to swear severely, to declare’.

It is a declaration of faith by a person possessed or seduced by an evil spirit, acknowledging the absolute rule of God in Jesus.

Just as in the film The Vatican Exorcist, ‘sin finds itself’, so in the Gospels Jesus speaks of taking up his cross.

Satan, I can’t say for sure at the moment because I have no experience of exorcism ceremonies regarding Satan myself, but I think the story wanted to say that the true God turns violence (satanic) into suffering (cross), and with a false God, when he claims to perform miracles of God, he makes them satanic.

Reference

Matthew : 16 : 24 – Then Jesus said to his disciples: ‘If anyone is willing to come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.

Luke : 9 : 21 – But speaking sharply to them, he instructed them not to tell this to anyone,

Luke : 9 : 22 – saying, ‘For the Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the elders and the leaders of the priests and the scribes, and be killed, and on the third day rise again.’

PATER noster, qui es in caelis, sanctificetur nomen tuum. Adveniat regnum tuum. Fiat voluntas tua, sicut in caelo et in terra. Panem nostrum quotidianum da nobis hodie, et dimitte nobis debita nostra sicut et nos dimittimus debitoribus nostris. Et ne nos inducas in tentationem, sed libera nos a malo. Amen.

(Pater Noster)

Nietzsche #Simone Weil.

Evil #Gospel.

Exorcism.

Cahier 2023/12/25

「重力と恩寵」 悪(La mal)シモーヌ・ヴェイユ

Le faux Dieu change la souffrance en violence. Le vrai Dieu change la violence en souffrance.

「偽物の神は、苦しみを暴力に変える。真の神は、暴力を苦しみに変える」

Alors, où mettre le mal ? 

「それでは悪をどこへしまい込めばいいのか」

Il faut le transférer de la partie impure dans la partie pure de soi-même, le transmuant ainsi en souffrance pure. Le crime qu’on a en soi, il faut l’infliger à soi.

「自分の中の不純な部分から純粋な部分へと悪に移し、悪を純粋な苦しみに変えなければならない。自分の中の罪を自分自身が背負わなければならない」

文法

・「Le faux Dieu」や「Le vrai Dieu」といった定冠詞を使って、特定の神に言及する。

・ 「change」は直接法現在「transférer」といった動詞は、対象の物事を他所に移すことを示す。

・「La partie impure」と「La partie pure」は、定冠詞を使って特定の部分を指している。

・「de soi-même」という表現は、myself、自己を示すために使われる。

・ 「qu’on a en soi」という表現は、自己を示し、前述の部分に関連する罪を指す。

・ 「à soi」という表現は、自己に対して行動を起こすことを示す。

Note:

何故だか、「それでは悪をどこへしまい込めばいいのか」が気になった。ヴェイユはあくまでも自分自身の内面にある「神秘性」と「不完全」に語りかけているようだ。人間の生の目的は自己実現であり、自分自身の限界や制約を超えることを提唱したニーチェの「自己超克」(Übermensch)のようにも思える。

しかし、カトリックのお祈りの「わたしたちを誘惑におちいらせず、悪からお救いください」の悪(ラテン語:malo)とは、「悪魔」を意味する。ヴェイユは哲学者でありながらも、カトリックの影響を受けているので、この場合の悪はニーチェ的な悪も含んでいるが、カトリックの位置付けている悪魔にも近いと思う。

ここで軽く、悪魔について。エクソシズムの語源は悪魔祓いという意味ではなく、「厳格に誓う、宣言する」というギリシャ語が語源とされている。悪霊に取り憑かれた人、もしくは悪霊の誘いを受ける人がイエスにおいて神の絶対的な支配を認め、信仰を宣言するものである。

映画、「ヴァチカンのエクソシスト」でも「罪は自分自身を見つける」とあったように、福音書でも、イエスは自分の十字架を背負うことを語っている。

悪魔、と言い切ってしまうと、私自身は悪魔に関しては祓魔式の経験もないので、今の所はっきりとは言えないが、真の神は、暴力(悪魔的な)ものを苦しみ(十字架)に変え、偽物の神とは、神の奇跡を謳っては、悪魔的なものにする、と、この話は言いたかったように思う。

#ニーチェ #シモーヌヴェイユ

#悪 #福音書

#エクソシズム

参照

PATER noster, qui es in caelis, sanctificetur nomen tuum. Adveniat regnum tuum. Fiat voluntas tua, sicut in caelo et in terra. Panem nostrum quotidianum da nobis hodie, et dimitte nobis debita nostra sicut et nos dimittimus debitoribus nostris. Et ne nos inducas in tentationem, sed libera nos a malo. Amen.

(ラテン語の主の祈り:Pater Noster)

それから、弟子たちに言われた。「私について来たい者は、自分を捨て、自分の十字架を負って、私に

従いなさい。自分の命を救おうと思うものは、それを失い、私のために命を失うものはそれを得る。

マタイによる福音書16:24から25

それから、イエスは皆に言われた。「私に付いて来たい者は、自分を捨て、日々、自分の十字架を負って、私に従いなさい。

ルカによる福音書9:23

Cahier(2023/11/27)English

A ceux qui voudraient faire grief à Simone Weil, sur- tout présentée par un prêtre, de ses erreurs, de ses exagé- rations, volontiers je répondrais : « Que lui lance la pre- mière pierre celui qui n’a jamais péché contre la lumière, qui en a suivi toutes les exigences, qui a été jusqu’au bout fidèle! » (John 3:20, 8:7)Le mot immortel du grand converti d’Hip- pone remonte à mes lèvres : « Que ceux-là s’emportent contre vous, qui ignorent le prix de la vérité…

To those who would criticise Simone Weil, presented above all by a priest, for her errors and exaggerations, I would gladly reply: “Let the first stone be thrown at him by the one who has never sinned against the light, who has followed all its demands, who has been faithful to the end! (John 3:20, 8:7)

The immortal words of the great convert of Hippo come back to my lips: “Let those be angry with you who do not know the price of truth…

La joie d’avoir trouvé, ou plutôt d’avoir reçu la vérité, doit-elle nous rendre insensibles à la sagesse douloureuse et incomplète  de ceux qui cherchent en gémissant et qui tâtonnent dans leur ascension? Fr. J.-M. PERRIN, Dominicain.

Should the joy of having found the truth, or rather of having received it, make us insensitive to the painful and incomplete wisdom of those who groan in their search and grope in their ascent? Fr. J.-M. PERRIN, Dominican.

The preface by Fr. Perrin, which is included in the Japanese translation, seems to be only available in the first French edition, and I bought it in a second-hand book, but it was not included in the book,

I bought it every time it came out on Kindle, and I tried to buy it several times, but I couldn’t get it because it couldn’t be sent to Japan or something, but eventually it arrived. It’s a book about ‘la sagesse’ (wisdom), ‘douloureuse’ (pain), ‘et incomplète’ (and incomplete), with ‘pain’ sandwiched between the incomplete and the wisdom. This is what I wanted to know.

C’est pourquoi j’ai intitulé ce livre Attente de Dieu, j’ai essayé par ce titre de traduire le « en upomèné », (Luke 8:15, 21:19)en patience de l’Evangile, un des mots que Simone savou- rait le plus, peut-être parce qu’elle y retrouvait une cer- taine saveur stoïcienne, mais plus certainement parce que c’était sa manière de se donner à Dieu, de s’en remet- tre à lui de tout rester en attente et en disponibilité totales.

That’s why I called this book Attente de Dieu (Waiting for God). With this title I’ve tried to translate the Gospel word “en upomèné”,(Luke 8:15, 21:19) in patience, one of the words that Simone liked best, perhaps because she found in it a certain Stoic flavour, but more certainly because it was her way of giving herself to God, of entrusting herself to him, of remaining in total expectation and availability.

I could also understand why Fr. Perrin, who is included in the Japanese version, chose “Attente de Diew”, a passage from Weil’s favourite Gospel.

la sagesse douloureuse et incomplète 

For who has known the mind of the Lord, so that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ. >>>>>>1st Corinthians : 2 : 16

The words of the Apostle Paul to the Corinthians. In this context Paul talks about wisdom and knowledge, pointing out the limits of human knowledge and understanding, ‘imperfect wisdom’. Other examples.

For my thoughts are not your thoughts, and your ways are not my ways, says the Lord.For just as the heavens are exalted above the earth, so also are my ways exalted above your ways, and my thoughts above your thoughts. >Isaiah : 55 : 8 – 9

Oh, the depths of the richness of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How incomprehensible are his judgments, and how unsearchable are his ways! For who has known the mind of the Lord? Or who has been his counselor?>>>-Romans : 11 : 33 -34

So similar stories are repeated throughout the Bible. The repetition changes slightly after the coming of Jesus, when Paul answers the question, “Who says that we know the mind of the Lord and counsel him?” by saying, “But we have the mind of Christ. This means that Paul himself and Christ’s followers are saying that by God’s grace they can accept Christ and respond to His teaching. So while Paul recognises that knowledge and wisdom are limited, he emphasises the importance of trusting in Christ and following his teachings.

As for Simone Weil’s “Waiting for God” (Attenet de Dieu), an edited version of a posthumous manuscript, I believe it is only possible because of this preface by Fr. Perrin. Having a priest like Fr. Perrin, who did not neglect his work with the poor, confirms that we have ‘the mind of Christ’.

As an aside, I had written about ‘imperfect wisdom’ in 2016, in reference to the Bobby Fischer chess story, but I can’t quite remember why I wrote it up again, as it was never mentioned. It may be that I was struggling with something about writing it down, not knowing whether to write it down as a beautiful story or a realistic one, or even my ‘true intentions’.

I can only remember why it was chess.

Chess can be played against each other, as in Fischer’s case, or it can be played as an artistic form of ‘chess problem’. In mathematics there is also such a thing as uniqueness of solution, but the difference between a chess game and a chess problem can be divided into uniqueness and non-uniqueness. In ordinary chess, for example, if there are any number of moves for White, it is a matter of depreciation. In chess jargon this is called a dual. Chess problems are specific to the art, and sometimes the only condition is that only uniqueness can be found in the filling. If any other move is found, it is ‘incomplete’.

 Uniqueness can also be found in the Bible. Of course it is only a ‘side issue’, as it depends on the context and historical background, but Judas still has to betray the story, John the Baptist has to warn Herod, and Jesus has to be executed. Any other option would certainly cease to be ‘holy’. So there are things that must not be moved. If we ask whether there is uniqueness in literature and philosophy, this may be the ‘incomplete wisdom’. Some are aware of the uniqueness in it, others are completely removed from it. Oscar Wilde’s Salome follows the uniqueness of what John the Baptist was like, with Salome being executed at the end. So does the death of Jane Eyre’s best friend. We are aware of the uniqueness of the house of God. What about Weil, some of which is unorthodox as an idea, but I think there is something completed by Father Perrin’s comments and criticisms.

There is an incomplete wisdom around uniqueness, something that cannot be reached by going around it. But it is painful because it is an attempt to move forward. To the joy of being human, as it were, “Attente de Dieu”.

****

****

This photograph shows chess player Bobby Fischer talking to President Castro. (Chairman Castro spears Fischer before the tournament).

Cahier(2023年11月27日)

A ceux qui voudraient faire grief à Simone Weil, sur- tout présentée par un prêtre, de ses erreurs, de ses exagé- rations, volontiers je répondrais : « Que lui lance la pre- mière pierre celui qui n’a jamais péché contre la lumière, qui en a suivi toutes les exigences, qui a été jusqu’au bout fidèle! » Le mot immortel du grand converti d’Hip- pone remonte à mes lèvres : « Que ceux-là s’emportent contre vous, qui ignorent le prix de la vérité…

>>> 特に一司祭が紹介する「シモーヌ・ヴェイユ」について、その誤りや誇張を不満とする人々に対しては、私は進んでこう答えたい。「光に反して罪を犯したことはなく、光のすべての要求に従い、最後まで忠実であった人は、彼女に最初の石を投げるが良い」(ヨハネ福音書3:20、8:7)・・・・・・ヒッポの偉大な改宗者(アウグスティヌスのこと)の不滅の言葉が私の唇にのぼる。「真理の価値を知らない人々はあなた方に怒るがよい・・・・・・」

La joie d’avoir trouvé, ou plutôt d’avoir reçu la vérité, doit-elle nous rendre insensibles à la sagesse douloureuse et incomplète  de ceux qui cherchent en gémissant et qui tâtonnent dans leur ascension? Fr. J.-M. PERRIN, Dominicain.

うめきつつ求め、上昇のために手さぐりする悩める不完全な知恵に対して、私達は自分が真理を持っているという喜び、あるいはむしろ自分が真理を受けいれたという喜びによって無感覚であるべきだろうか? ――シモーヌ・ヴェイユ著・神を待ち望む・ペラン神父の序文――

日本語訳に収録されているぺラン神父序文は、フランス語版は初版しかないようで、古本で購入しましたが収録されておらず、

キンドルで出るたびに買ったり、何度か買おうとトライしてますが日本には送れませんとかで手に入らなかったのが漸く届きました。la sagesse (知恵)douloureuse(痛み) et incomplète(そして不完全)と、不完全と知恵に「痛み」が挟まっている。これが知りたかった。

C’est pourquoi j’ai intitulé ce livre Attente de Dieu, j’ai essayé par ce titre de traduire le « en upomèné », en patience de l’Evangile, un des mots que Simone savou- rait le plus, peut-être parce qu’elle y retrouvait une cer- taine saveur stoïcienne, mais plus certainement parce que c’était sa manière de se donner à Dieu, de s’en remet- tre à lui de tout rester en attente et en disponibilité totales.

私がこの本を「神を待ち望む」と題したのはそのためであって、シモーヌが最も気に入っていた言葉のひとつである福音の「忍耐のうちに」« en upomèné »(ルカによる福音書8:15、21:19)という言葉を翻訳しようとしたものである。 おそらく彼女は、ある種のストア学派的な香りを、この言葉に感じていたのだろうが、より確実なのは、それが神に身を委ね、完全な期待と可能性の中にとどまるという彼女の方法だったからである。

日本語版に収録されている何故、ぺラン神父が「神を待ち望む」としたのか、ヴェイユの好きな福音書から選んだという箇所も見れた。

悩める不完全な知恵

「誰が主の思いを知り、主に助言するというのか」しかし、私たちは、キリストの思いを抱いています。1コリントの信徒への手紙 2:16 (共同訳:以下同じ)

使徒パウロがコリントの信徒たちに対して述べた言葉。この文脈では、パウロは知恵や知識について語っていて、人間の知識や理解力には限界があること「不完全な知恵」について指摘している。他にも

1. イザヤ書55:8-9「『わたしの思いは、あなたたちの思いと異なり、わたしの道は、あなたたちの道と異なる』と主の仰せ『天が知よりも高いのに わたしの道はあなた型の道より高く』

2. ローマ書11:33-34「ああ、神の富と知恵と知識のなんと深いことか。神の裁きのいかに究め難く、その道のいかに辿り難いことか。誰が主の思いを知っていたであろうか。誰が主の助言者となっただろうか。誰がまず主に与えて その報いを受けるであろうか」

というように聖書には似たような話が繰り返されている。イエスの到来以降、その繰り返しが少し変わるのは、「誰が主の思いを知り、主に助言するというのか」という問いに対して、パウロは「しかし、私たちは、キリストの思いを抱いています」と答えるところにある。これは、パウロ自身やキリストの信徒たちは、神の恵みによってキリストを受け入れ、キリストの教えに応じることができると言っていることを意味する。したがって、パウロは知識や知恵が限定的であることを認識しながらも、キリストに信頼を置き、キリストの教えに従うことの重要性を強調している。

シモーヌ・ヴェイユの「神を待ち望む」(Attenet de Dieu)について、死後に集められた原稿を編集したものだが、私はこのペラン神父の序文があってこそ成り立っていると思っている。ペラン神父のように、貧しい人への活動を怠らなかった聖職者がつくことによって、「キリストの思いを抱いていること」を肯定される。

2016年に「不完全な知恵」に関して、チェスのボビーフィッシャーの話に準えて書いたことがあったけれども、何故私が並べたのかは記載がなかったため、その理由をいまいち思い出せない。ただ単に、書き残すことについて、美談にするか現実的に書くのか、「本意」すらもわからない状態で何かをもがいていたのかもしれない。

なぜ、チェスだったのか、それだけ触れることはできる。

チェスはフィッシャーのように対戦するものと、芸術性を表す「チェスプロブレム」というものがある。数学でも、解の一意性というものがあるけれども、チェスの対戦とチェスプロブレムの違いは、一意性であるか、ないかの違いに分かれる。普通のチェスは、例えば白にとって何手でも打つ手が存在する場合、減価事項となる。チェスの専門用語でこれをデュアルと言う。チェスプロブレムというのは、芸術に特化したもので、詰め方に一意性だけしか見当たらないものが条件だったりする。他の手が見つかると「不完全」となる。

 聖書にも一意性はあったりする。勿論、文脈や時代背景に左右されるのであくまでも「側面」的なことではあるが、ユダはやはり裏切らないと話が進まないし、洗礼者ヨハネはヘロデに警告しなければならないし、イエスは処刑されなければならない。他の選択肢があったら「聖」でなくなる。このように、動かしてはならないものがある。文学や哲学において一意性というのは存在するのか、といえばそれこそ「不完全な知恵」なのかもしれない。それには一意性を意識しているものであれば、完全に離れていくものもある。オスカーワイルドサロメは、サロメが最後に処刑されるという、洗礼者ヨハネとはどういう存在だったかという一意性に沿っている。ジェーンエアの親友の死もそうだ。神の家というものの一意性を意識している。ヴェイユはどうだったのだろうか、思想として正統派ではないものもあるが、ペラン神父が注釈や批評をつけていることによって完成した何かがあると思っている。

一意性を巡った不完全な知恵は迂回しながら、何処かへ向かおうとする。痛みを伴うのは、進もうとするからである。それこそ「神を待ち望む」ように。

他サイトリンク(カトリック・あい)私が書いたコラムです。

>>二枚目の写真について:チェスプレイヤーのボビー・フィッシャーがカストロ議長と話している写真である。(カストロ議長はトーナメント前にフィッシャーに横槍を入れている)

Cahier(2023/11/17/)English

Der Gott Jesu Christi Betrachtungen über den Dreieinigen Gott.

Wieder kann man von hier versuchen, ahnend etwas über Gottes inneres Geheimnis zu sagen: Vater und Sohnsind die Bewegung reinen Schenkens, reiner Übergabe an- einander In dieser Bewegung sind sie fruchtbar, und ihre Fruchtbarkeit ist ihre Einheit, ihr völliges Einssein, ohne daß sie dabei selbst zurückgenommen und ineinander aufgelöst werden. Für uns Menschen heißt Schenken, Sichselbergeben, immer auch Kreuz.(Das trinitarische Ge- heimnis übersetzt sich in der Welt in ein Kreuzesgeheim- nis: Dort ist die Fruchtbarkeit, aus der der Heilige Geist kommt.

English translation:Once again, we can attempt to glimpse something of God’s inner mystery from this point: the Father and the Son are the movement of pure giving, pure surrender to one another. In this movement, they are fruitful, and their fruitfulness is their unity, their complete oneness, without being absorbed or dissolved into each other.For us human beings, giving of the self always entails the cross. (The mystery of the Trinity is translated into the world as the mystery of the cross: It is from this fruitfulness that the Holy Spirit emerges.)

Characteristics of the text

The text mentions ‘God’s inner mystery’, the distinctive parts of which contain mainly religious-philosophical elements.

「Vater und Sohn sind die Bewegung reinen Schenkens, reiner Übergabe aneinander.」:it contains philosophical discussions and analyses of individual words and concepts. The images of parent-child relationships and mutual gifts presented here represent ideas about the existence and nature of God.

・ 「In dieser Bewegung sind sie fruchtbar, und ihre Fruchtbarkeit ist ihre Einheit, ihr völliges Einssein, ohne daß sie dabei selbst zurückgenommen und ineinander aufgelöst werden.」:this statement illustrates the argument about the triune nature of God. It says that God’s existence is expressed as fullness and that this fullness is related to the unity of the Trinity.

・「Für uns Menschen bedeutet Hingabe, Selbsthingabe, immer auch Kreuz (Das trinitarische Geheimnis übersetzt sich in der Welt in ein Kreuzesgeheimnis: Dort ist die Fruchtbarkeit, aus dem der Heilige Geist kommt).」:In the interpretation of the Trinity of God in human experience and faith, the image of the cross and the concept of the Holy Spirit are themes often discussed in religious philosophy and theology and are also illustrated here.

As is characteristic of Benedict XVI’s writings, his texts are highly philosophical and show deep thought. He deals with religious themes and expresses mystical concepts. His writing is concise but dense, and each sentence is full of meaning. His style is rigorous and is used to convey certain concepts clearly. Benedict XVI sometimes uses a dialogical style, explaining his ideas in a supposed dialogue with his readers. This dialogue format may represent the one-dimensional personality of the one and only distant ‘Pope’. His writings show a fusion of rational argument and philosophy of faith. In particular, he uses ethical arguments to show that ‘faith’ and ‘reason’ are compatible. He seems to focus on communicating complex theological concepts in a way that is accessible to the general reader.

Summary

An attempt is made by Benedict XVI to understand the ‘secret of the Trinity’ together with the reader. The Father and the Son are described as engaged in a pure act of giving, in a work of ‘total devotion’ to each other. This work results in their fruitfulness, which is described as their perfect unity and oneness. However, it is also clarified that this process does not lead to their annihilation or merging into each other. It is further asserted that for human beings, giving and self-giving are always associated with the Cross. The secret of the Trinity is seen as manifesting in the world as the secret of the Cross. The explanation offered is that through the Holy Spirit, the Cross holds within it the potential for fruitfulness and abundance.

The difference between philosophical writing and everyday writing.

A philosophical text can be described as a multifaceted yet concise exploration of topics related to deep thinking and philosophical concepts. The term philosophia, coined by Socrates, encompasses the love of knowledge, also known as philosophy. These writings often employ logical reasoning. Both the current Pope, Pope Francis, and his predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI, can be seen as having philosophical elements in their teachings. They delve into concepts such as reflections on existence and religion, including faith, eternal life, the Last Judgement, the law of love, and the relationship with God. However, it is also necessary to provide more specific and succinct explanations using everyday language. For example, ‘Hingabe’ and ‘Selbsthingabe’ are German words meaning ‘devotion’ or ‘devotion to self’. To better comprehend their meanings, specific examples or situations can be used to explain them.

「Für uns Menschen bedeutet Hingabe, Selbsthingabe, immer auch Kreuz (Das trinitarische Geheimnis übersetzt sich in der Welt in ein Kreuzesgeheimnis: Dort ist die Fruchtbarkeit, aus dem der Heilige Geist kommt).」If the original text of the following were to be shown in more everyday terms,

「In unserem menschlichen Verständnis bedeutet Hingabe immer auch Opfer (Das Geheimnis der Dreifaltigkeit offenbart sich in der Welt als das Geheimnis des Kreuzes: Hier liegt die Fruchtbarkeit, aus der der Heilige Geist entspringt)」In our human understanding, devotion always implies sacrifice as well. (The mystery of the Trinity is meant to be unveiled to the world as the mystery of the Cross.)

「In unserem menschlichen Verständnis bedeutet Hingabe immer auch Opfer」The translation is more of an everyday expression than a philosophical reflection on ‘what it means to give of oneself’, in line with the idea that true human commitment always needs to involve some sacrifice (e.g. time, comfort).

Finally, to return to the original again.

Für uns Menschen heißt Schenken, Sichselbergeben, immer auch Kreuz.(Das trinitarische Ge- heimnis übersetzt sich in der Welt in ein Kreuzesgeheim- nis: Dort ist die Fruchtbarkeit, aus der der Heilige Geist kommt.

“The reason why there are two instances of ‘der der’ is that the first one, ‘aus der’, translates directly as ‘from’, indicating that something is coming out of ‘der Fruchtbarkeit’ (abundance). In this context, it signifies the coming out of ‘der Heilige Geist’ (the Holy Spirit) from abundance. The second ‘der Heilige Geist kommt’ consists of the definite article ‘der’ and the noun ‘Heilige Geist’, signifying the arrival of the Holy Spirit. These elements represent the mysteries of the Trinity, which are of different natures yet closely intertwined.

If we were to write this without ‘der der’, for example,…”

Für uns Menschen bedeutet Hingabe, Selbsthingabe, immer auch Kreuz (Das trinitarische Geheimnis übersetzt sich in der Welt in ein Kreuzesgeheimnis: Dort ist die Fruchtbarkeit, aus dem der Heilige Geist kommt.(* Changing ‘Schenken’ and ‘Sichselbergeben’ to ‘Hingabe’ and ‘Selbsthingabe’ maintains consistency in context.)

“This is a trial translation and we would be grateful for any comments.

Following on from the previous edition, we have decided to include a memo-like section called “Cahier.”

Japanese

Cahier(2023年11月17日)

イエス・キリストの神(三位一体の神についての省察)教皇ベネディクト16世

Der Gott Jesu Christi Betrachtungen über den Dreieinigen Gott.

Wieder kann man von hier versuchen, ahnend etwas über Gottes inneres Geheimnis zu sagen: Vater und Sohnsind die Bewegung reinen Schenkens, reiner Übergabe an- einander In dieser Bewegung sind sie fruchtbar, und ihre Fruchtbarkeit ist ihre Einheit, ihr völliges Einssein, ohne daß sie dabei selbst zurückgenommen und ineinander aufgelöst werden. Für uns Menschen heißt Schenken, Sichselbergeben, immer auch Kreuz.(Das trinitarische Ge- heimnis übersetzt sich in der Welt in ein Kreuzesgeheim- nis: Dort ist die Fruchtbarkeit, aus der der Heilige Geist kommt.

和訳:ここで再び、神の内なる神秘について、おぼろげながらに語ることができます。父と子は、お互いに純粋に与え合い、純粋に引き渡し合う運動です。この動きの中で、両者は実り豊かであり、その実り豊かさとは、互いに引き取られ、溶け合うことのない両者の「一つ」、完全な「一つ」なのです。

私たち人間にとって、自己を捧げることは常に十字架を意味します(三位一体の神秘は、この世では十字架の神秘に翻訳されなければなりません:そこには聖霊が臨む実りがあるのです)。

特徴

この文章では、「Gottes inneres Geheimnis」(神の内なる秘密)について言及されていますが、その特徴的な部分は主に宗教哲学的な要素が含まれています。

・ 「Vater und Sohn sind die Bewegung reinen Schenkens, reiner Übergabe aneinander.」:個別の言葉や概念についての哲学的な議論や分析を含んでいます。ここで示されている親子関係と相互の贈り物のイメージは、神の存在や本性についての考え方を表しています。

・ 「In dieser Bewegung sind sie fruchtbar, und ihre Fruchtbarkeit ist ihre Einheit, ihr völliges Einssein, ohne daß sie dabei selbst zurückgenommen und ineinander aufgelöst werden.」:この文は、神の三位一体の性質に関する議論を示しています。神の存在が豊かさとして表され、そしてその豊かさが三位一体の一体性と関連していることが述べられています。

・「Für uns Menschen bedeutet Hingabe, Selbsthingabe, immer auch Kreuz (Das trinitarische Geheimnis übersetzt sich in der Welt in ein Kreuzesgeheimnis: Dort ist die Fruchtbarkeit, aus dem der Heilige Geist kommt).」:神の三位一体を人間の経験や信仰の中で解釈する際に、十字架のイメージや聖霊の概念は、宗教哲学や神学で頻繁に論じられる主題でありますが、ここでもそれが示されています。

ベネディクトベネディクト16世の文章の特徴として、彼の文章は非常に哲学的であり、深い思考を示しています。彼は宗教的なテーマを扱い、神秘的な概念を表現しています。 文章は簡潔ですが、密度があり、一文一文が多くの意味を含んでいます。彼の文体は厳格であり、特定の概念を明確に伝えるために使用されています。ベネディクト16世は時々、対話形式を使用していて、読者との対話を想定して思想を解説する。この対話形式が唯一の遠い存在である「教皇」の一面的な人格を表すことになるのかもしれない。彼の文章は、理性的な議論と信仰的な哲学の融合を示しています。特に彼は「信仰」と「理性」が両立可能であることを示すために、倫理的な議論を使用してる。彼は複雑な神学的な概念を一般の読者にも理解しやすく伝えることに重点を置いているように思えます。

要約

ベネディクト16世による、読者との「三位一体の秘密」を理解しようとする試みが述べられています。父と子は純粋な与え合う動きであり、互いに「完全な献身」の働きにあるとされています。この働きにおいて彼らは実り豊かであり、その実り豊かさが「彼らの」統一であり、完全な一体感(一つ)であるとされています。しかしその過程で彼ら自身が取り消されたり、互いに融解したりすることはないとも述べられています。また、人間にとって与えること、自己を捧げることは常に十字架とも関連しているとされています。この三位一体の秘密は、世界においても十字架の秘密として現れます。そして、十字架の中には聖霊による実り豊かさがあるという説明になっています。

「哲学的な文章と日常的な文章との違い」

哲学的な文章とは何か、一面的でありながらも簡潔に述べると、ソクラテスがフィロソフィア(知を愛する=哲学)という言葉を定着させたことは有名ですが、一般的に思考や哲学的な概念に関連するテーマを探求し、深い洞察を提供することなどがあげられます。これらの文章には論理的な推論が含まれていたりします。現教皇である、フランシスコ教皇や前任のベネディクト16世も、哲学的な要素を含んでいると言えます。彼らが掘り下げる概念は、信仰、永遠のいのち、最後の審判、愛のおきて、神との関係など、存在と宗教に関する考察を含んでいます。一方、日常的な言葉の説明を行う場合は、より具体的で簡潔な説明が必要となるでしょう。例えば、「Hingabe」や「Selbsthingabe」はドイツ語で「献身」や「自己への献身」を意味する言葉ですが、これらの言葉の意味を説明する際には、具体的な例や状況を用いてより理解しやすい説明が求められることがあります。例えば、「Für uns Menschen bedeutet Hingabe, Selbsthingabe, immer auch Kreuz (Das trinitarische Geheimnis übersetzt sich in der Welt in ein Kreuzesgeheimnis: Dort ist die Fruchtbarkeit, aus dem der Heilige Geist kommt).」の原文を、より日常用語として示すとしたら、

「In unserem menschlichen Verständnis bedeutet Hingabe immer auch Opfer (Das Geheimnis der Dreifaltigkeit offenbart sich in der Welt als das Geheimnis des Kreuzes: Hier liegt die Fruchtbarkeit, aus der der Heilige Geist entspringt)」私たち人間の理解では、献身は常に犠牲も意味します。(三位一体の神秘は、十字架の神秘としてこの世に啓示されることになる)

「In unserem menschlichen Verständnis bedeutet Hingabe immer auch Opfer」というのは、人間が真の献身を示す際には、常に何らかの犠牲を伴う(例えば、時間や快適さ)必要があるという考えに即した翻訳で、「自己を捧げると言うこと」ということについて哲学的考察というより、日常寄りの表し方にしています。

最後に、再度、原文に戻ると

原文:Für uns Menschen heißt Schenken, Sichselbergeben, immer auch Kreuz.(Das trinitarische Ge- heimnis übersetzt sich in der Welt in ein Kreuzesgeheim- nis: Dort ist die Fruchtbarkeit, aus der der Heilige Geist kommt.

何故、derderが2回続くのかというと、1回目の「aus der」は、直訳すると「… から出てくる」という意味です。この文脈では、「der Fruchtbarkeit」(豊かさ)から「der Heilige Geist」(聖霊)が出てくることを表現しています。2回目の「der Heilige Geist kommt」は、定冠詞の「der」と、名詞の「Heilige Geist」から成り立っています。これは、聖霊が来ることを示しています。三位一体の神秘がそれぞれ異なる性質を持ち、しかも密接に関連しています。

例えばderderを使わないで書くとしたら、

Für uns Menschen bedeutet Hingabe, Selbsthingabe, immer auch Kreuz (Das trinitarische Geheimnis übersetzt sich in der Welt in ein Kreuzesgeheimnis: Dort ist die Fruchtbarkeit, aus dem der Heilige Geist kommt.(*「Schenken」と「Sichselbergeben」を「Hingabe」と「Selbsthingabe」に変えることで文脈に一貫性を保っている)

これは試訳ですので、指摘がありましたらよろしくお願いします。

前回に続き、カイエというメモ的なページを掲載することにしました。

Cahier(15 November 2023). English

Introduction.

Starting this month, I will post “just a short analysis” of a text I like. The title will be Cahier (date).

I will also continue to update my previous critiques.

La pesanteur et la grâce 1

Today it is Simone Weil.

Ce n’est pas la faute qui constitue le péché mortel, mais le degré de lumière qui est dans l’âme quand la faute, quelle qu’elle soit, est accomplie. La pureté est le pouvoir de contempler la souillure.L’extrême pureté peut contempler et le pur et l’impur ; l’impureté ne peut ni l’un ni l’autre : le premier lui fait peur, le second l’absorbe. Il lui faut un mélange. —L’attention et la volonté 

In terms of gravity and grace (La pesanteur et la grâce), this is what is described in “L’attention et la volonté” (Attention and will).

Simone Weil was a 20th century philosopher, so the French language itself is not ancient. Simone Weil’s original text (in French).

The characteristic feature is a literary melody, and this quotation does not rhyme, but some words and ideas are repeated, so there is a sense of rhythm,The choice of words and phrases are thought-provoking and complex in a short text.

 Translation: It is not the fault that constitutes mortal sin, but the level of enlightenment present in the soul at the time of the transgression, regardless of its nature. Purity is the ability to contemplate impurity. Extreme purity can contemplate both the pure and the impure; impurity can do neither: the former frightens it, the latter engulfs it. It requires a mixture.

・The term “mortal sin” or “sin unto death”, although not a direct reference, is found in the New Translation of the Bible, 1 Romans 6:23: “For the wages of sin is death. But the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. ”, etc., may also derive from Christian doctrine. Le péché mortel (‘the sin that leads to death’)

is translated as ‘mortal sin’.

Contempler (plural: contemple)’ is used, usually in the context of ‘to look at, introspection’, which is deeper than observation(look). The usual meaning is ‘regarder la souillure’, which means ‘to look at the dirt’.

Summary: This text is a short summary of the exploration of sin and purity. It states that sinning is not in itself a fatal sin, but the degree of light in the soul is what matters.

It states. It is because we are very pure beings that we have the power to see what is pure and what is impure. An impure thing is something that has been mixed with the impure thing.

So in terms of mixing, it is necessary to look not only at the pure but also at the impure.

Cahier(2023年11月15日)

はじめに

今月から、気に入った文章の「簡単な分析だけのもの」を投稿していきたいと思います。

その際はタイトルはCahier(日付)とします。

今までの批評の更新も、今後も続けていきたいと思います。

La pesanteur et la grâce (1)

今日はシモーヌヴェイユです。

Ce n’est pas la faute qui constitue le péché mortel, mais le degré de lumière qui est dans l’âme quand la faute, quelle qu’elle soit, est accomplie. La pureté est le pouvoir de contempler la souillure.L’extrême pureté peut contempler et le pur et l’impur ; l’impureté ne peut ni l’un ni l’autre : le premier lui fait peur, le second l’absorbe. Il lui faut un mélange. −L’attention et la volonté 

重力と恩寵(La pesanteur et la grâce)でいえば「L’attention et la volonté」(注意と意志)に記載されているものです。

シモーヌ・ヴェイユは20世紀の哲学者ですので、フランス語自体は古いものではありません。シモーヌ・ヴェイユの原文(フランス語)の

特徴は、文学的な旋律があり、今回のこの引用は韻律はありませんが、一部の言葉や考えが繰り返されているのでリズム感があり、

言葉選びや、フレーズは思索的な複雑さを短い文章の中で孕んでいます。

和訳:死すべき罪を定めるのは過失ではなく、その過失がどのようなものであれ、過失が成し遂げられたときに魂の中にある光の度合いである。純粋さとは、汚れを注視する力である。極限の純潔は、純粋なものと不純なものを注視することができるが、不純なものはそのどちらもすることができない。前者(純粋)はそれを恐れさせ、後者(不純)はそれに溶け込んでいる。これには混ざり合うことが必要だ。

・「死すべき罪」もしくは「死にいたる罪」とは、直接的な言及ではないけれども、新訳聖書の1ローマ信徒への手紙6:23「罪の支払う報酬は死です、しかし、神の賜物は、私たちの主イエス・キリストにある永遠の命なのです」等キリスト教教義にも由来しているかもしれません。

「死にいたる罪」(Le péché mortel)は「致命的な罪」と訳されます。

・「contempler(複数形:contemple)」が使用されていますが、通常は「凝視、内省する」という文脈で使用され、より思索として深くなっています。普通に「汚れを見つめる」という意味でなら「regarder la souillure」となります。

ー要約:この文章は、罪と純粋についての探求を短くまとめています。罪を犯すこと自体が致命的な罪ではなく、魂の内にある光の程度が重要であるとしています。純粋なものと、不純なものを見る力を持つのは、非常に純粋な存在であるためです。不純なものというものは、不純なものに溶け込んでしまっている。なので、混ざり合うことについて、必要なことは純粋さのみではなく、不純にも目を向けることだということになります。

試訳ですので、指摘がありましたらお願いします。

**

Le devenir et la poésie-English.ver

The goldfish expands, motionless, beneath the azure sky.
A serene silence within the bowl no longer defies.

A dove's silhouette gracefully dances upon the glass,
Arriving, a petal amidst white clouds, a scene so vast.

Chuyo Sakurama  1911-07-06	~1934-04-18

“The Analysis of Poetry”

Beneath the azure sky, the goldfish expands, motionless.’ This sentence alone drew me in. The euphoria that followed still lingers. The Japanese translation is ‘Under the azure sky, the goldfish ate the azure sky and became motionless in its bowl’. Did it fill its stomach with the sky, or was it suffocated by the vastness of the world? Is ‘stuck in a bowl’ death or just ‘expression’?

 The author of this poem is probably not well known in Japan. I myself have only recently become aware of him. There is almost no information about him in Japan, except that he was a writer who died prematurely while still a student at Waseda University. (At the moment) There are expressions that are unique to the Japanese language, so I was not sure whether to translate them into English, but I will leave them here as a trial translation.

Beneath the azure sky, the goldfish expands, motionless.

A serene silence within the bowl no longer defies.

A dove’s silhouette, a gentle presence, bathed in light,

Gracefully dancing upon the glass, casting shadows so slight.

Arriving, a petal amidst white clouds, a scene so vast.

I was torn between translating “The goldfish expands, motionless, beneath the azure sky” and “The goldfish expands, motionless, beneath the azure sky”, but I chose the contradiction and contrast in terms of rhythm and poetic expression. I did not choose “blue sky” because, firstly, “goldfish” is a summer term in Japan, so the summer sky is “azure”. Secondly, the author “Chuyo Sakurama” died on 18 April 1934 while a student at Waseda University. The name “Azure Sky” was chosen because of the song “Azure Sky”. I hope this will lead to the memory of the deceased.

  By the way, did this goldfish really die? I leave that interpretation to the reader, but I think it is dead. However, the poem is close to ‘impermanence’ in Buddhist terms, but the fact that I did not dare to call it death, and the contrast between the fluttering of the dove’s wings and the thin shadows and sparkles of existence, sometimes made it seem like Deleuze’s(Deleuze and Guattari) ‘generative change’(devenir) of transformation, rather than limiting it to death. Of course, in the verbal state of the poem, the stationary goldfish and the scene do not continue in continuity, not affecting each other as separate entities.

But what if we look at it from a ‘metaphorical’ point of view? Where has the goldfish gone? The goldfish is transformed in the poem, flapping its wings, as an entity that does not depend on anything else. In the case of Buddhist ‘impermanence’, individual beings coexist and coexist with other beings, but this poem goes beyond that and contains ‘diversity’ through poetry. I found myself in my mind,There was an emotion that I could not capture myself. In the English translation, the dove is the most vital, so light and shadow.

I rhymed it with shadows so light, because the dove is the most vital. I gave priority to the English rhythm and made it dance.

This means perseverance in the poetic feeling.

The typical disease that causes goldfish to swell and die is ‘ascites’but in the early stages life can be prolonged by lowering the water temperature, but in the later stages it cannot be saved. We suppose that such a situation could not be dealt with in the Japanese summers of the Showa period. The idea of the poem is whether it is the owner’s guilt for letting the goldfish die, whether it is all a fantasy, or whether this death, especially for a creature like a ‘goldfish’, is immediately buried in the earth. Most people would not make much of a grave. But anyone who has seen the weakness of a dead goldfish knows how fragile it is. This poem, with its physically weightless ascent, seemed to ‘love’ something, as if it were ecstatically in love with the world itself, even with the passing of the day. Not sad, this silence is not sad because it survives differently. Enclosed in the glass of a goldfish bowl as the light of the world shines through. What protects life, is it that life lasts, or is it that it is as fragile as glass, or that it continues to swim?

It is not sad because of the overlap.

however, as there is ‘realm of shadows’ or ‘king of heaven’.

***

translation into German(attempted translation)

Der Goldfisch dehnt sich aus, regungslos, unter dem azurblauen Himmel.

Eine stille Ruhe in der Schale widersteht nicht länger.

Die Silhouette einer Taube tanzt anmutig auf dem Glas,

Wie ein Blütenblatt inmitten weißer Wolken, eine solch weite Szene.

Includes internal rhyme. But I would like to be taught.

***

I also think the goldfish seems to have fallen in love and become still. In truth it would have described death,

The ‘word’ is brought back to life by the human voice.

I earnestly hope that we can follow the words with our eyes, speak them aloud and continue to see the “world” from what we can see to what we cannot.

The departed never return, their presence forever gone, But many times we wish.

The English translation, however, was an attempt at prose, just as the Old Testament Book of Job was a ‘prose’ version of Job’s Lament,

I rhymed it because it seemed to me that there was not only unhappiness but also happiness through poetic feeling.

*****

Differences between Buddhist ‘impermanence’ and generative change (simplified)

Similarities include the denial of permanence and fixity in entities and existence, and the emphasis on change and fluidity, with all phenomena and events being constantly changing and temporary. They share the ‘view’ that the existence of individuals and objects is influenced and changed by surrounding circumstances and causal relationships.

The difference is that in impermanence, all beings inevitably change, whereas in generative change, generation and change constantly create new things and bring diversity. The Buddhist teaching of impermanence aims at liberation by eliminating the causes of suffering, attachment and desire,

Generation and change’ is about individuals accepting change and fluidity, constantly engaging both banks,

Generative change’ implies a process of distortion in which the individual is pulled away from its ‘natural’ form. It is in this ‘in-between’ that something happens in generative change. This includes the emergence of diversity and inwardness. While Buddhist ‘impermanence’ emphasises the temporary nature of the process of individuals and events, Deleuze’s ‘generative change’ emphasises the continuous fluidity and capacity for change of individuals and events.

****

金魚は青空を食べてふくらみ(桜間中庸)


金魚は青空を食べてふくらみ
鉢の中で動かなくなる
鳩だか 鉢(はち)のガラスにうすい影を走らせる
來たのは花辨(はなびら)か 白い雲の斷片(かけら)

"桜間中庸『〔金魚は青空を食べてふくらみ〕』


考察 “The Analysis of Poetry”

「金魚は青空を食べてふくらみ 鉢の中で動かなくなる」この一文だけで惹き込まれた。

それは、天空によって金魚は「お腹」を満たしたのか、それとも膨大な世界によって窒息してしまったのか。「鉢の中で動かなくなる」というのは、「死」なのか、それとも「表現」に止まるのか。

 この詩の作者は、日本でも知っている人は少ないのかもしれない。私も最近知ったのである。なんでも、早稲田大学在学中に夭折した作家としか、こちらでもほぼ情報がないのである。(現時点)英訳をするか迷ったが、試訳として残しておくことにする。

Beneath the azure sky, the goldfish expands, motionless.

A serene silence within the bowl no longer defies.

A dove’s silhouette, a gentle presence, bathed in light,

Gracefully dancing upon the glass, casting shadows so slight.

Arriving, a petal amidst white clouds, a scene so vast.

(試訳:ChrisKyogetu)

訳として“The goldfish expands, motionless, beneath the azure sky”と悩んだが、リズムと詩的表現としての矛盾と対比を選んだ。“blue sky”としなかったのは、まず「金魚」が日本では夏の季語であること、それによって夏の空が「紺碧」であること、著者「桜間中庸」が早稲田大学在学中に1934年4月18日に亡くなったということ、それと早稲田大学には「紺碧の空」という歌があることから、“azure sky”とした。それが故人を弔うことに通じることを願う。

  この金魚は、死んだのだろうか。その解釈は各々の読者に委ねることになるが、私は死んだと思っている。この詩は仏教でいえば「無常」に近いが、敢えて死と表現しなかったことや、対比して鳩の羽ばたきや、薄い影と存在が瞬いていることから、死と限定するのではなく、変容するというドゥルーズとガタリの「生成変化」のようだと思えることがあった。勿論、詩の言葉通りの状態のみなら、静止した金魚と、情景は別々の存在で互いに影響して連続して続いているわけではない。しかし、「隠喩」的に見るとどうだろうか。金魚の姿は何処へ行ったのか、金魚は詩の中で羽ばたきと共に、何処にも依拠しない存在として、変容しているのである。仏教的な「無常」の場合は、個々の存在が他の存在と相依し、共存するが、この詩は、詩によってそれを超えて「多様性」を含んでいる。気づけば心の中で、自分自身でも捉えきれない感動があった。英訳では鳩が最も生命力があるので、光(light)と薄い影を(shadows so slight)と韻を踏み、英語のリズムを優先し、羽ばたき(clap)ではなく、dancingにした。それによって詩情の中で持続を意味しようとしている。

金魚のお腹が膨れて死ぬ病気は「復水病」が代表的なものであるが、初期段階であれば、水温を下げれば延命できるが、末期になると助からない。昭和時代の日本の夏に、そのような対処が出来なかったとは推測する。詩の発想は、金魚を死なせた飼い主の罪悪感なのか、全てが単なる空想なのか、この死、特に「金魚」のような生き物の場合はすぐに土に埋められ、墓すら大したものは作らない人が殆どだろう。一度でも死んだ金魚の脱力感を見たことがある人なら、その儚さを知っているだろう。この詩は、その肉体の重みを感じさせない上昇が、まるで何かを「愛している」とでも言うかのように、過ぎ去りし日常でさえも、この世界そのものを恍惚に愛しているかのように思えた。金魚鉢のガラスに包まれた、世界から透過されて光が来るように。命を守るものとは、命が続くというのは、ガラスのように脆いのか、それとも泳ぎ続けることなのか。だとしても悲しくない、その静止は異なる生存が重なることによって、かなしくないのだ。

けれども、「彼の世」−– king of heaven があるように。

****

ドイツ語訳(試訳)

Der Goldfisch dehnt sich aus, regungslos, unter dem azurblauen Himmel.

Eine stille Ruhe in der Schale widersteht nicht länger.

Die Silhouette einer Taube tanzt anmutig auf dem Glas,

Wie ein Blütenblatt inmitten weißer Wolken, eine solch weite Szene.

内韻(Binnenreim)を含む。但し、教示して頂きたいところです。

声に出して読んでみると、動かなくなると言うのは、語り方次第で、

金魚は恋でもして静止したようだとも思う。本当は死を描写したのだろうに、

人の声によって、「言葉」が息を吹き返すように。私たちが、言葉を目で追い、声で発し、見えるものから、見えないものまでの「世界」を見続けられることを切に願う。

英訳は旧約聖書の「ヨブ記」はヨブの嘆きを「散文」にしたことから、散文を試みていたが、

不幸なだけではなく、詩情による幸福があるように思えたので韻を踏むようにした。

****

仏教の「無常」と生成変化の違い(簡易)

類似点としては、実体や存在における永続性や固定性を否定し、変化と流動性を強調し、

全ての現象や事象が絶えず変化し、一時的なものであるとしています。両者は、

個体や物の存在が周囲の状況や因果関係によって影響を受けていて、変化するという「観点」を

共有しています。

相違点としては、無常は、全ての存在が必然的に変化しますが、生成変化とは、生成と変化が

常に新しいものを生み出し、多様性をもたらすという点が違います。仏教の「無常」は

苦の原因や執着や欲望を取り除くことによって解脱を目指す教えですが、

「生成変化」は個体が変化と流動性を受け入れて、常に両岸を巻き込むことであり、

「自然な」形から引き離されるような歪形のプロセスを意味する。生成変化において何かが

起こるのはその「あいだ」で起こることである。それによって多様性、内面を形成することも含まれる。仏教の「無常」は、個体や事象の過程における一時的な性質を強調しますが、ドゥルーズの「生成変化」は、個体や事象の持続的な流動性や変化能力を強調します。

****

“unpunished sin”–−’THE HINT OF AN EXPLANATION’ Graham Greene’

“The word Satan is so anthropomorphic”

'THE HINT OF AN EXPLANATION' Graham Greene

“Unanswered Sin” – A Reflection on Graham Greene’s ‘The Hint of an Explanation’

A man said this to an ‘agnostic’. The encounter between the two men begins when the agnostic throws away a piece of tasteless, ‘Dry bun ‘and his eyes meet those of the Roman Catholic man. On a depressing night train journey after the end of the Second World War, the Catholic man tells of his childhood.

This is the story ‘THE HINT OF AN EXPLANATION’ in Graham Greene’s ’21 Short Stories’. He converted from Anglicanism to Catholicism, was nominated for the Nobel Prize for Literature, and although he did not win, his other works have been made into films, but in his later years he also dabbled in child prostitution, and apart from his works and his life as a writer, he is not a priority for me to deal with, but this ‘Hint of Explanation’ is the most highly regarded, as it is said to be the most Catholic of his works.

To return to the story, from the agnostic man’s point of view, the man he met seemed happy. This was partly due to a prejudice that this was a characteristic of Catholics, and the dialogue with the ‘happy man’ was a boring experience. The Catholic man’s stories about God were boring to the agnostic. Sensing this, the man added a few words. If you put the invisible into words, it becomes a cliché, and I can only give you hints. So the man started talking about ‘Satan’. That’s a word that’s too limited to describe,” the happy man continued, and so the agnostic finally became amused and began to listen to the story.

The happy man, “David”, was forced as a child to help at mass in a small church. Wearing a surplice,・・・・・・ the village had only about 50 Catholics, and traditionally Catholics were hated in the country. This was because of the past of a 16th century Protestant martyr who was burned at the stake. The man’s nickname was Popey Martin, associated with the Pope. The boy was not interested in the rituals and costumes of the Mass, and at the same time he was afraid of making a mistake. One day the boy sight of the husband of one of the bakers. The man was obsessed with hatred of Catholics and was ugly. He was also a freethinker and no Catholic would buy bread from him. The man saw the boy, approached him and gave him a curly cake. He had a fine ‘electric railway’ in his house. The boy was told he could play with it as he liked and began to go to the man’s house. Each time the man gave him bread, and one day he told him that he had made the same stocking that was given out at Catholic communion, He fed it.

So I asked Isn’t that just the same as you eat in church?. The boy replied, “Difference. The man asked, “Why? The boy replied, “Because It hasn’t been consecrated.”. The man said, like a biologist, “If you look at them under a microscope, they are the same, aren’t they?” he said, The boy then tried to show that it was useless to look at them under a microscope by saying, “accident(endekomenon) does not change. The man said, ‘Then I want to try the consecrated buns’ Bring it to me. Then I will give you this electric railway”. The man’s aim was: “I want to taste what your God tastes like”, but the boy is tempted by the model train, which is perfect, and at the same time the man threatens him with a master key and a knife with which he can enter any house, so he steals the hostia.

But the boy stays in his room and does not go to the man. Nevertheless, the baker came to the boy’s house, used the master key and even entered his room, looking down at the boy by the light of the moon. David, where is it?’ the man whispered. The boy would not tell him where the hostia was on the chair. When he refused too much, the man began to threaten to cut you up. So the boy went and got the hostia on the chair, swallowed it and said, ‘I swallowed it’ and ‘Go home now’. Then the man shed tears and left in the darkness, a defeated man.

If holy is at a distance and is separate from God, does it cease to be holy? No, what is holy remains holy. Even if it seems that something has gone, it can come back if there is a will to return to holiness.

 The boy has realised that what he is doing now, what the baker is saying, is a more serious sin than the punishable sin of murder, even if he takes away the hostia. Until now he had thought of Mass as something repetitive and boring, something that fits into everyday life, but by engaging with this man he becomes more aware of his own holiness. Through his encounter with a man who seemingly seeks to exploit him, the boy comes to reaffirm the true meaning of the ritual he had once taken for granted.

From the perspective of the agnostic man, the Catholic man appeared to have a certain inner peace. This impression may have been influenced by preconceived notions about Catholics. However, to the agnostic, discussions about God did not seem particularly engaging.

Finally, the original title of the novel is ‘THE HINT OF AN EXPLANATION’, but the Japanese translation may be difficult to understand. How about this?

Explanation is a verbal explanation of the reason for the delay, while Description is a written explanation. Shouldn’t the ‘holy’ be made to ‘interact’ even if the explanation wasn’t good enough? Just as Jesus walked and visited people…

Communion,’Communion’ means Various exchange.

 The priest in this story is in dialogue with an agnostic who is also “happy” because of his love. But we must not forget that the ‘happiness’ of a priest is not all there is in the world. This priest is also a small being in the world. What we should be more aware of is that if absurd treatment is the darkness of the tunnel, then we should create the world after we have gone through it.

Japanese version

*about accident.

Beginning with Aristotle’s endekomenon and developed by Thomas Aquinas. It has since been developed in various philosophies and theologies, so it is not easy to summarise.

 Thomas Aquinas held that entities are ‘perceived by the intellect’ through and beyond the sensible perception of the accident. Since the idol belongs to the senses and the substance to the intellect, the transformation of the substance of the bread into the body of Christ is in no way inconsistent with the fact that the idol still appears to our eyes as sensibly the same thing. It is by faith that, after the transformation of the substance, we recognise the idol with our senses and the substance of the body of Christ.

Adolf Harnack, as a Protestant theologian, disagreed with Thomas Aquinas’ “The body of Christ as idolatry in bread.

If it is present until it disappears, is that not idolatry?” he objected. But Harnack asked whether the dog was “eaten in error? or ‘eaten as a sacrament’, but this ‘hint of explanation’ for the metaphor of ‘whether Jesus is present?

seemed to answer the question.

‘The Caterpillar’, Rampo Edogawa.

I honestly believe it to be one of the most stirring human-interest stories of the day.
'The Caterpillar', Rampo Edogawa.




  1. Introduction.
  2. Ⅰ Case1 :Devotion and sadism
  3. Ⅱ  Case2 :The Form and the Life
  4. Ⅲ  Case3 : The Eye of the World Egg
  5. Ⅳ  Case4:Illusions, dialogue and heroic story
  6. Dependent Origination

Introduction.

Tokiko’s husband, ‘Lieutenant Sunaga’, was hailed as the pride of the army and regarded as a military god; however, he lost all four limbs in the war. His face was covered with scars, he had lost his hearing and vocal cords and could not speak well, yet his internal organs continued to function, albeit slowly, and he remained capable of living as a man. His appearance could be described as a ‘caterpillar’; however, as the term refers to the larval stage, it is almost impossible to determine his sex. The wife’s mind towards her husband, who could not speak and lacked any semblance of masculinity, transformed into neither husband nor man, but solely her own source of pleasure and despair, a repulsive existence. Even the wife of Edogawa Rampo, who authored this work, criticized it as ‘disgusting’, and it was once banned in 1939 under wartime censorship.

This story flows with the fluidity of a pen stroke and bears no sense of forethought or calculation. It is a strange tale; however, in modern times, such a situation could be interpreted as an example of reduced quality of life. The wife stabs her husband in the eye with an edged tool in an act of lust; however, this seemingly cruel act may today be interpreted as a manifestation of caregiver fatigue, shifting the emphasis towards caregiving from the wife’s perspective. Literature and medical ethics are often said to go hand in hand. The ‘distance’ provided by fiction lends objectivity, and cruelty—while seemingly chaotic at first glance—takes on the form of a kind of law when arranged as a novel. Therefore, a ‘cruel’ story can ultimately challenge and provoke the reader.

This story could indeed be perceived as discriminatory towards people with limbless conditions; however, the third-person perspective preserves ambivalence by focusing on the wife’s introspection, presenting it as a problem arising in the mind of one without physical impairments.

At the beginning of the story, Tokiko’s greatest aversion is to ‘grilled eggplant’, a vegetarian dish that, according to one theory, was invented by monks prohibited from eating meat in order to imitate its texture and taste. Tokiko’s limp bite of aubergine at the outset symbolically foreshadows her desires. When one eats something detested, disgust spreads from the tongue throughout the body. Perhaps only Rampo could be fascinated by the pleasures derived from sensation and touch.

The third-person perspective focuses mainly on the wife’s introspection, yet also highlights the couple’s prolonged frustration, their ensuing conflicts, the transformation of attachment into aggression, and the ambivalence underlying it all. The wife’s actions unfold like passages in a modern psychology textbook, and their home resembles the observation room of a psychologist.

Ⅰ Case1 :Devotion and sadism

The husband, who had lost all four limbs, was forced to crawl or bang his head against the floor in order to express his will. He conveyed his frustration by repeatedly striking himself, and each time his wife responded with polite attentiveness.

“I’m coming now. You must be hungry.”
“I’ve kept you waiting a long time, haven’t I? Be patient for just a moment.”

The wife would hand her husband a piece of paper and a pencil, upon which he would inscribe his frustration in distorted letters.

“Tired of me?”

Her husband, searching for her until his head struck the floor, wrote words as contorted as his body. The wife, however, answered with a faintly teasing calm: “You’re jealous again, aren’t you?” One of her own kisses relieved her anxieties, while her husband’s every movement became another source of excitement and lust for her. To the woman, this “organism” was not merely a spouse, but a perverse and thrilling toy.

“You’re jealous again, aren’t you?”

Tokiko embodied two faces.

“As for you, however, your continued faithfulness has deprived you of all your former pleasures and desires. For three long years you have sacrificed everything for that poor crippled man, without emitting the faintest breath of complaint. You always contend that this is but the natural duty of a soldier’s wife, and so it is. However, I sometimes cannot help feeling that it is a cruel fate for a woman to endure—especially for one so very attractive and charming as you, and so young as well. I am deeply struck with admiration. I honestly believe it to be one of the most stirring human-interest stories of the day. The question which still remains is: how long will it last? Remember, you still have quite a long future ahead of you. For your husband’s sake, I pray that you will never change.”

The world perceived this woman as devoted to her husband, imagining that she had renounced her desires and elevated their union into an ideal of conjugal fidelity. In such a view, the renunciation of ‘greed’ symbolized chastity: the wife caring for her husband with unwavering devotion. However, reality was more ambiguous. The husband remained capable of functioning as a man, and the wife regarded him as a bloated yellow caterpillar, a grotesque lump of flesh through which her sadism was revealed.

Outwardly, Tokiko conformed to the expectations of society, embodying the image of a chaste wife. The world surrounding her was familiar, and this familiarity endured as long as she remained within it. People already possessed a preconceived image of her, and there was no need for Tokiko to disturb that illusion.

One cannot easily destroy the impression of such a familiar world. Desire does not endure eternally; therefore, when one steps outside, it naturally adapts to external norms. In that outside world, Tokiko remained ‘honest’. She would smile, euphemistically embodying chastity as soon as she stepped beyond her front door. There was no falsehood in this performance. However, once she returned home, she was consumed with disgust at her husband’s ugliness, and at her own lust for that ugliness. The recognition that her heart was not governed by pure love, but rather by disordered and unreasonable passions, filled her with fear as much as with pleasure.

Her husband demanded that Tokiko bring him newspaper articles and medals from his military service. At first, he was content to look upon them; however, he soon grew weary of these relics. The only act left to the couple was intercourse, which left them both with an animal-like emptiness, as though imprisoned in a cage. In such circumstances, would his wife realize that beneath the virtues of chastity she was, in truth, a horrible woman hiding behind a mask of devotion? She lived under the weight of condemnation by the world she knew. Moreover, her husband no longer bore the dignity he once possessed; he was now at her mercy. Despite this, he remained immobile, calling out to her whenever she was absent for even a short while, thereby further constraining her. The crescendo of Tokiko’s swelling emotions and introspection halted only when she straddled her husband.

Her control over him, fragile as it was, became uncontrollable. At last, Tokiko placed her hand over his eyes and crushed them with a deadly weapon as he stared at her.

She wrote “Yurushite” (Forgive me) several times across her husband’s chest; however, he offered no response. Unable to bear either the pity of his condition or the burden of her own guilt, she involuntarily abandoned him. Upon her return, she discovered him gone. On the bedpost lay a nearly illegible note, resembling the playful scribbles of a child. She discerned that it read “Yurus” (I forgive you). Yet, her husband had crawled away, bent his neck like a sickle, and cast himself into the well to his death.

The act of bending one’s neck like a sickle is an old Japanese figurative expression, likening the raised head of a snake in fighting stance to the curve of a sickle. Whether his end constituted a soldier’s death or an assertion of will remains unresolved. However, Tokiko imagined the phantom of her husband’s face, interwoven with the certainty that he had forgiven her.

Ⅱ  Case2 :The Form and the Life

If Part I may be regarded as a psychological study centered on Tokiko, Part II provides a broader overview. A work of art is never confined to a single interpretation. Rather, incompatible interpretations coexist, representing the complexity of a civilization. When a work of art becomes a form rather than a sound, it becomes deeply tied to the visual. Consider, for example, the motif of ‘hands’: Albrecht Dürer’s Praying Hands conveyed expression through gesture; Caravaggio’s St. Matthew revealed angelic fingers embodying scholastic philosophy; Rembrandt’s St. Matthew, by contrast, depicted hands resembling those of laborers, emphasizing the sheer force of divine dictation. Life is form, and form is life.

The armless Venus de Milo attains this significance by chance. Even without arms, her presence has captivated countless viewers. The absence of arms has rendered the emotions of “hands” more evocative and imaginative. Novels, however, exist in a world without form. They also lack sound. They are left to the construction of a third world in the mind of the reader, a world even the author cannot fully comprehend. Language, too, represents the human psyche, processed in the depths of consciousness as both the world of imagination and the language of God. If language, like vegetation, possesses an ecosystem, then perhaps nothing disrupts that ecosystem more than language itself. Language attempts, sometimes actively and sometimes passively, to become the form of an invisible entity which, from the perspective of vision, ought to remain in the lower strata. Edogawa Rampo’s The Caterpillar may be described precisely as such a work.

It is not difficult to imagine a darkened room, oppressively devoid of light, in which a limbless husband lies at Tokiko’s feet. In the English translation, certain words such as 肉毒楽 are omitted; these terms—“thing,” “flesh,” “lump of flesh”—all referred to the husband. However, it must be remembered that he is not merely “flesh” animated, but rather life in its universal essence, embodied in a particular form. The human spirit is highly susceptible to the shaping power of circumstances and environment. The husband has lost his hands, the organs of expression, and he has no feet, the symbols of independence.

The reader can easily look into the eyes of the woman, Tokiko. We enter the couple’s bedroom, a place concealed from the outside world. In the darkness, the Caterpillar waits for his wife to illuminate him, and she becomes that light. As we enter this space, the reader is gradually manipulated by the couple. Eventually, we become entangled in the psychological portrayal of Tokiko herself. A number of metaphors emerge concerning the gaze directed at the husband’s form: first Tokiko’s gaze, then that of the neighbors, then society, then past glories, and finally the husband himself. Above all, the husband’s gaze constituted the sole human expression of emotion.

A house is not merely to be looked at; it must be lived in and fashioned. (Francis Bacon, Essays.) This is why the husband grew weary of the past glories represented by his military order. One cannot live each day simply to look upon them. Nocturnal activities are not only biological, but also become habitual. Just as Louis XIV required a finely crafted chair, so too does a man require customs that constitute his role. As husband and wife, they were expected to enact movements that become cultural and customary. However, for the husband who had lost all four limbs, this role as husband was replaced by that of a “caterpillar.”

If her husband’s body were a sculpture, Tokiko might even have found it beautiful to behold. However, like a sculpture, the lifeless had not acquired life; rather, the living had been reduced to lifelessness. Their function as husband and wife, which should have extended into the living space they shared, had dissolved into illusion. It did not even leave room for the “fantasy” of imagining what their household might have been had he retained his limbs. Instead, the narrative draws us ever deeper into the inner life of the husband whose eyes were crushed.

It was not only the wife’s virtue that was tested. The husband’s virtue, too, was placed on trial. This is where the endgame unfolds. Could he maintain his dignity as a husband with a wife who had once been devoted and supportive? He no longer expressed his will by furiously banging his head against the wall—that was his only means of protest. The muffled sound of water ultimately signaled the death of the man who had no limbs and could not swim. There seemed to be nothing left but the presence of a living soul within a fragile form.

Yet the husband acted as if he were still a man with arms, even though he could only write by holding a pen in his mouth. Not merely as a body with limbs,
but as a person endowed with a heart,

he inscribed the word 「ユルス」I forgive you—to his wife.

Ⅲ  Case3 : The Eye of the World Egg

The invisible gaze constructs the illusion and the very space of a “heroic story.” It is not altogether clear to what extent “love” in Japan at that time shared features with what we recognize today. However, why do these two individuals seem to embody a sense of love not so different from our present experience? Perhaps it is because modern “free love” does not guarantee universal happiness or the capacity to cultivate character. Love can be a blessing; however, it can also descend into sin, powerful enough to drive another person to death. At its foundation, love requires, in Erich Fromm’s words, “discipline.” Nevertheless, we cannot deny that love is fleeting, particularly when we turn to classical Japanese literature. For it is also libido, the raw energy of life.

There was never any doubt in my mind that Tokiko had a loving husband. Yet when love and sexual desire coexisted, she assumed the initiative and became violent. Crucially, she was not unconscious of her actions but remained acutely self-aware. Her guilt restrained her from altering her course, and she trembled before the invisible censure of the world. After she blinded her husband, she repeatedly traced the word 「ユルシテ」 (forgive me) across his chest with her finger. Rampo’s narrative traverses darkness, pleasure, fear, and sudden acceleration through his wife’s introspection; however, from the moment she pleads for forgiveness, she appears strangely calm, without surrendering to despair. To some readers, her repeated ユルシテ may appear as genuine reform; to others, it is merely a self-centered cry for absolution.

At the same time, Tokiko began to weep, longing to see the ordinary faces of the outside world, leaving her disfigured husband behind. Unable to endure solitude, she fled. Many people tend to distinguish between husband-and-wife and love itself; however, I do not. For love, hate, and all negative emotions are inescapably entangled in human intimacy. The woman did indeed love her husband; however, she was devoured by her own greed. Yet the absence of virtue does not negate the existence of “love.” The fact that only memories shine, while the present yields no shadows, does not mean that the bond has been severed.

What criteria determine the end of a relationship? Married couples may divorce; even Catholic marriages can be annulled. However, where does the past itself reside while its memories continue to live on?

This is equally true of our relationship with the dead. The crucial difference is that memories with the dead halt at a fixed point, and the dead themselves cease to change beyond that point. Therefore, the living can continue to love a “record” that no longer evolves. Memories shift their perspective under different lights, becoming imaginatively fluid, yielding new interpretations, and thereby allowing affection for the dead to remain alive. In contrast, when both parties remain alive, “change” is often far more difficult. Alienation can emerge, particularly when one can no longer utter words of love. For the unmarried, separation usually follows; however, in marriage the situation is profoundly different. Divorce may exist in law; however, it remains exceedingly difficult to speak of the bond between two people who have reached such an impasse. Even when two individuals have resolved never to meet again, a residue of love persists somewhere within the hidden corners of the heart. Returning to the couple in The Caterpillar, I felt the strength of their bond when the wife continued to inscribe 「ユルシテ」 across her husband’s back.

In childhood, many Japanese may have played the game of tracing letters with a finger on another’s palm or back, challenging the recipient to guess the words. Yet unless the letters are simple hiragana or katakana, recognition becomes difficult. One wonders whether the husband truly understood his wife’s words, especially in his weakened state. Reading also requires confidence. Perhaps the sensation of his skin was dulled by the trauma of his eye injury. Whether his body truly received those words in full remains uncertain. Nevertheless, the husband left behind a final note: 「ユルス」.

It may be that her words were never understood.

It is precisely because of this uncertainty that I cannot help but feel the profound weight of his soul in that final 「ユルス」. The weight of the soul cannot be measured by superficial love.

Indeed, perhaps he did not understand at all. And yet, paradoxically, this seems the truest answer.

Dialogue is not always possible, even under ordinary circumstances. One may, in fact, receive another’s words only in the manner one wishes to hear them. To be told simply “forgive” may itself be a word the victim does not desire to receive, given what has transpired.

Stimulation between man and woman does not always follow order. It is not simple to discern how much derives from affection and how much from sheer stimulation. Between men and women there are times when we may conclude deductively that it is love, and times when we can only infer inductively that it must be so, by virtue of their being man and woman. Every individual is destined to embody both.

The severing of their relationship in “this world” culminated in the husband’s suicide. The impulse that compelled him remains difficult to explain.

Schopenhauer, in his reflections “On Suicide” (The World as Will and Representation), referred to the Latin punctum saliens (the “salient point”) as “the egg of the world.” The phrase is difficult to translate, signifying a minute source or spring, yet Schopenhauer employed it to designate the very focal point of existence. In contrast to phenomena such as human desire and human love, he identified the act of reproduction as the highest expression of will. Whatever the historical context, reproduction stood in stark contrast to the unfolding of phenomena surrounding something as sacred as the Lord God, as a “tiny spring-like source” of human functioning, untouched by fluctuations of love, will, or passion. That much remains undeniable.

Another thinker, Simone Weil, also meditated on the punctum saliens. In her chapter on “de-creation” in La Pesanteur et la grâce, she wrote: “That a fictitious divinity has been given to man.” She further remarked that “there are only two moments in life when we are completely naked and pure: the time of birth and the time of death,” seeking thereby to remove the self through uncompromising inner exploration.

If we strip Schopenhauer’s and Weil’s notions to their common ground, we discover a dark gaze surrounding phenomena that may appear disturbing, loving, or disappointing. In human presence and in human absence alike, we become anonymous observers. Rampo himself confessed: “My character as a dreamer does not feel an itch, no matter how I am treated by the real world” (in reference to political meaning). Indeed, it is true that this story possesses a distinctly subjective perspective, a fantasma of shifting phenomena. In contrast to mere fantasy, a fantasma parallels the relationship between perception and sensation. Is The Caterpillar not perhaps an attempt to define conjugal love beyond the values of its age, rather than a story of simple fantasy? Yet it remains fantasy nonetheless, for Tokiko continued to behold visions of the Caterpillar even after her husband’s death.

The couple’s task was the source of both life and death—the primal force creeping between all phenomena, the “original sin” of humanity. No matter how a relationship ends, no matter how life and death divide, no matter how memories fade or are embellished,

the eye, the egg of the world, remains at the very center of human life.

Ⅳ  Case4:Illusions, dialogue and heroic story

Concerning the difference in dialogue between man and woman, one recalls the story from chapter 5 of the Song of Solomon. The bride’s affection for the groom had cooled, and she refused to open the door when he called. While the groom eagerly devoted himself to her from behind the door, the bride eventually changed her mind and opened it—yet he was already gone. “His words made me faint. I sought him, but he did not answer me” (Song of Solomon 5:6).

Just as the “bridegroom” is replaced by the Lord in biblical teaching, so too do relationships bound by love seek a Lord-like fidelity, intersecting and yet betraying one another. Tokiko and her husband might well be understood through this lens of crossed dialogue. Although the meaning of “love” in modern Japan differs from that of the past, the connection between beautiful stories, the sacred, and the Lord remains relevant. Love is the one reality to which human beings will swear allegiance, the one force that gives coherence to existence. It is loyalty. Even when not religious, even when conceived as a familial contract, eternal bonds and fidelity are demanded. We help one another and live together under the expectation that we are always recognized, even when unseen. Understanding and respecting differences, while cultivating inclusion, becomes indispensable. The pursuit of happiness requires that love precede comprehension, that goodness act before it can be named as love. However, despite its deceits and betrayals, reason persists as the part of the soul that still longs for fidelity.

In The Caterpillar, her husband inscribed 「ユルス」 in katakana, holding the writing pad with his mouth in his limbless state. It was only possible because of the concise form of Japanese katakana. By contrast, the English phrase “I forgive you” would have been exceedingly difficult to form in such conditions. What if he did not truly know what his wife had written, but instead grasped it inwardly? What if, as in the Song of Solomon, despite the crossing of words and gestures, a dialogue nevertheless occurred? If so, then her husband’s act embodies the ideal of dialogue in love. Dialogue does not always reside in words, and yet, ultimately, words are needed to express both will and heart. He understood this with profound clarity.

What remained for Tokiko was the redemption of her husband’s phantom, the recurring “caterpillar” that visited her each spring. Human beings and their emotions are frail, even hopeless; however, there exist treasures that can only be uncovered through contact with this very frailty.

Rampo himself plunges the reader into illusion. He repeatedly unsettles us with the question of where his tale finds its resting place. The uncanny story of the Caterpillar—his wife’s plea, her husband’s forgiveness, his death as a god of war—remains, in my view, the most haunting of Rampo’s works. Each time Tokiko saw a caterpillar, she was reminded of him. Though her personality was once distorted, her form altered, she continued to see only her husband, and he lived on for her. The story may even be perceived as an expression of single-minded devotion.

Earnest? No—mysterious. It is, in truth, a strange and wondrous story.

Dependent Origination

Do you think this story is cruel? To me, it appears as love. To protect and to love that which is fragile is, in truth, profoundly complex. And through doing so, I myself become fragile. I accept the balance of both the sacred and the profane. It is precisely because of human weakness that the sacred can be discerned. This is, I believe, a worldly tale—yet one that is also a metaphor, even a parable.

Notice on Historical Expressions

This work contains expressions that reflect the social and cultural context of its time. These terms may be perceived as discriminatory or outdated today, but they have been preserved in this translation to remain faithful to the original text. Readers are encouraged to approach them as part of the historical and literary background of the work.

「芋虫」江戸川乱歩

全く感心していますよ。今の世の美談だと思っています。
「芋虫」江戸川乱歩

  1. はじめに
  2. Ⅰ Case1 献身とサディズム
  3. Ⅱ Case2  形と生命
  4. Ⅲ Case3 「世界の卵という眼」
  5. Ⅳ  Case4 幻想・対話・美談 

はじめに

時子の夫「須永中尉」は、陸軍の誇りだと称えられ、軍神のような存在だったが、戦争によって四肢を失ってしまう。夫の顔は傷だらけで、聴力、声帯も失い上手く話せないが、内臓は鈍いながらも動き、男性としても機能していた。姿形は「芋虫」と言えるが、芋虫とは幼虫の段階のことであり、性別の判断はほぼ不可能である。話せもしない、男らしさのカケラも感じない、そんな夫への妻の心は、夫でもなく、男性というものでもなく、自分の快楽と鬱憤晴らしや、気持ち悪い存在でしかなくなってしまう。この作品を書いた江戸川乱歩の妻でさえこの作品は「いやらしい」と批判し、この作品は1939年に一度、戦時中の検閲により発禁となった。この話はまるで一筆書きのように流麗で、伏線という計算を感じさせない。これは奇談に過ぎなかったが、現代ではこういった事をQOLの低下の一例となるかもしれない。妻は情欲の果てに夫の眼を潰してしまうが、この残酷のように思える妻の行動も現代となれば、介護疲れとして妻の立場に立ったケアを重視されるのかもしれない。文学と医療倫理の相性は良いと聞く。虚構であるからこその「距離感」が客観性を与え、一見、無秩序であるような残酷さは、小説の形態となると、ある種の法則のように整えられる。このように「残酷」な話は人々に何か課題のように見せることがあるのだろう。

この話は四肢のない状態の人間に対して差別的に思われるような話だが、第三者視点が妻の内観に焦点を当てることによって、身体に問題の無い人間の心に問題があるようにし、アンビバレンスを保っている。

 物語序盤、時子は「茄子の鴫焼き」を一番嫌いだとあった。鴫焼きとは精進料理であり、一説によると肉が食べられない僧侶が歯ごたえや味を鴫に似せるために作られたらしい。この紹介の始まり、今から情欲について展開される予兆として、時子がこの茄子をぐにゃりと噛む食感は色んなことを暗示させる。苦手なものを口にするときというのは舌から全身へと嫌悪感が走る。感触、触感から得られる快楽に拘った乱歩ならではなのかもしれない。 第三者視点によって焦点が当てられるのは主に妻の内観だが、夫婦のフラストレーションの長期化、それによる両者のコンクリフト(葛藤)、愛着の対象が攻撃となること、アンビバレンス。妻の取った行動は、現代にとっては心理学の教科書のようであり、彼等の家はまるで心理学者の観察部屋のようだった。

Ⅰ Case1 献身とサディズム

四肢を失った夫は、意思を表すのに這いずり回るか自分の頭を床にぶつけるしかなかった。何度も何度もぶつけて不満を表し、その度に妻は丁寧に対応する。

「今、行きますよ。おなかがすいたでしょう」

「待ち遠しかったでしょう。すまなかったわね」

「今、ランプをつけますからね。もう少しよ、もう少しよ」

妻は夫に紙と鉛筆を渡すと夫は口に加えて不満を書いて言葉にした。

「オレガ イヤニナッタノカ」(俺が嫌になったのか?)

夫が頭を床にぶつけてまで自分を求め、姿同様の歪んだ字を書く者に、 「また妬いているのね」と、あやす。それから自分の接吻一つで安堵をし、一挙一動するものだから、妻にとって それがまた興奮の種となり情欲が湧いてしまう。妻にとってこの「肉独楽」(にくごま)は興奮する玩具だった。

時子には建前と裏の顔があったのだ。

「あの廃人を三年の年月少しだって厭な顔を見せるではなく、

自分の欲をすっかり捨ててしまって、親切に世話している。

女房として当たり前のことだと云ってしまえばそれまでじゃが、

出来ないことだ。わしは、全く感心していますよ。今の世の美談だと思っています

「どうか気を変えないで面倒見てあげてくださいよ」

外の人間は、この妻は欲を捨てて夫に尽くしていると思っていて、今の世の美談として、この夫婦に理想すら抱いている。この場合の「欲」を捨ててというのは、世間が妻に貞淑、献身的に夫の世話をしていることだった。しかし、実際は「少し」違っていた。夫は男性として機能が残っていたし、妻は夫をのことを、肥えた黄色い芋虫であり、奇形な肉独楽のよう扱い、「サディズム」が表れていた。

外に行けば時子は 貞淑な妻として、外の空気に合わせる。彼女にとって、自分を取り巻く世界というのは、馴染みがある世界だった。特に遠出でもしない限りそうだろう。時子を取り巻く人は 時子に対して何らかしらのイメージを持って既に存在している。それをわざわざ崩してまで時子が何を明かさなければならなかったと言うのだろうか?

人は中々、この馴染みがある世界、自分の印象を崩すことは出来ない。情欲というものはずっと続くものではなく、外に行けば彼女も自然に外に合わせる。外の世界ではそれ用に 彼女も「正直」だったのだ。玄関から外へと出れば時子は貞節な妻として、婉然と微笑んだのだろう。そこに嘘があるわけではない。そして家に戻れば、夫の姿の醜さや、その醜さに欲情することを、妻は自分の心が純愛でないことや、道理が合わず秩序立てられない感情に嫌気を差し、自分の情欲、快感と共に恐れも持ち始める。

夫も以前は自分の活躍していた頃の新聞記事や勲章を時子に持たせて眺めて満足していたが、やがて飽きてしまった。夫婦二人で出来ることと言えば、行為にあけくれることだけで、動物の檻の中にいるようで虚無感があった。そんな中で、妻は自分が貞節の美名に隠れて、恐ろしい女だと見透かされるのではないかと、馴染みがある世界から、指を突き刺されて責められているのではないかと強迫観念に駆られる。その上、夫は嘗てのような凛々しさがなく、自分の言いなりだ。その割には動けない彼は自分が少し居ないぐらいで呼んでは、結局のところ自分を束縛する。時子の膨らむ感情、時子が夫へと跨るときに内観の描写はここで一旦、静止する。

時子は、弱々しい彼への支配力や感情が収拾つかなくなり、時子は夫の眼に手をかけ自分を見つめる夫の眼を凶器で潰してしまう。

目を潰された夫の胸に妻・時子は「ユルシテ」(Forgive me)と何度か身体に書いたが夫は返事をする素振りは見せなかった。妻は段々と夫の置かれている状況の哀れさと、自分の罪への意識に耐えかねられなくなり夫から思わず離れてしまう。そして、戻ってみると夫は居なくなっていて枕元の柱に子どもの悪戯書きのように読みにくい文字を残してあるのを見つける。妻はそれを「ユルス」と記してあると気づいたが、夫は身体を這いずり、もたげていた鎌首をガクンと落とし、井戸の中へと落ちて死んでいった。鈍い水音は手足がなく泳げない夫の死を意味している。

鎌首をもたげるとは、蛇が首を持ち上げた姿が鎌に似ていることから、戦闘体制に入るときに使う比喩表現である。夫の最期は、軍人としての死なのか、死に向かうことへの意志の表れなのか、謎は残るが、妻は夫から許されたと確信と共に夫の面影の幻想を思い描いた。

Ⅱ Case2  形と生命

Ⅰが妻に寄り添った心理的考察だとするのなら、Ⅱはもっと俯瞰したものになる。芸術作品というものは、一つの解釈に捉われない。相容れない解釈がひしめき合っていて、一つの文明を表している。芸術作品は音ではなく「形」となった時、視覚との縁が深くなる。例えば、「手」それはアルブレヒト・デューラーの「祈りの手」であり、絵画では表情を伝えるものとして重要なモチーフだった。カラヴァッジョの聖マタイにスコラ哲学を伝える天使の指、そしてレンブラントの聖マタイの手は、天使の口述の凄まじさを表しているかのように手が労働者のような手をしている。命とは「形」であり、「形」とは命である。腕が無い「ミロのヴィーナス」はそれを偶然にも成功させている。腕が無くても彼女の存在は多くの人達を魅了してきた。それこそ色んな解釈と一緒に―――腕が無いからこその、「手」が魅せる感情を想像のものとした。それに対して、小説は、「形」のない世界である。ついでに「音」もない。それらは、著者でも把握しきれない読者の第三の世界の構築に委ねられている。言葉とは、人間の精神をも表し、想像の世界や、神の言葉として人の内奥で処理される。言語に植物のように生態系があるとするのなら、言語ほどその生態系が乱れるものはないのかもしれない。それは時には積極的に、そして消極的に、視界中心でいえば低層部であるはずの見えない存在が、「形」になろうとする。江戸川乱歩の「芋虫」はそのような作品の一つと言える。灯りをつけなければ不便なほどの暗い部屋、時子の足元に、四肢の無い「夫」が転がっていることが想像しやすい。英訳版では「肉独楽」という言葉の翻訳が無く、Thing,flesh,lump of fleshとこれらは夫のことを意味している。しかし忘れてはならないのは、夫は「肉」が生命を持ったのではなく、生命の形(普遍)が、特殊な形になってしまったのだ。そして、人間の精神というものは、状況や環境という形にとても影響されやすい。感情を表す手を失い、自立するためにある「足」も無い。

読者は簡単に妻、「時子」の眼を手に入れることが出来た。外部が知る由もない夫婦の寝室に、私たちは踏み込むことになる。暗闇の部屋の中に、妻の灯りを頼りに待つ「芋虫」の姿、彼にとって妻が光だった。このように一歩引いて空間を手に取りながらも、次第に読者はこの夫婦に操作される。やがて妻の心理描写に感情移入する。ここには夫の「形」を巡っていくつもの視線の隠喩が存在する。まずは妻の時子、次に近所の人、世間、過去の栄光、そして夫。特に夫は「視線」だけが人間的に感情を表すものだった。家というものは、眺めるためだけにあるのではない、生活をし慣習化させる。(フランシス・ベーコン『随筆集』)だからこそ、夫は過去の栄光であった勲章に飽きてしまったのだろう。眺めているだけでは毎日が生きられない。夜の営みも生物学的なものだけではなく、これらも慣習化する。ルイ14世が立派な椅子に座るように、人間とはその人の役割である習慣が必要となる。それは、夫として、妻として、それぞれ文化的、慣習化となる動きをしなければならない。それが四肢を失った夫にとって、それは夫という役割ではなく、「芋虫」のようになってしまった。

夫の姿が彫刻であれば、鑑賞者として美しいとすら思うのかもしれない。しかし、彫刻のように命無きものが命を得たのではなく、命あるものが、失ったのだ。二人の居住空間に広がるはずの夫婦としての機能は幻となってしまったのか、それはそうではない。まだ夫に四肢がまだ残ったままだったら、どんな家庭になっていたのだろうかという「妄想」の隙さえも与えなかった。それはより目が潰された夫の内面に引き込まれるからである。美徳を試されているのは妻だけではなかった。また夫も美徳を試されていた。そこに終盤になって気付かされる。献身的に支えてくれる妻がいることで、夫として威厳が保てるのか。気狂いで頭をぶつけて意思表示をしていたのではない。それしか手段がなかったのだ。「形」の内部に、生身の魂があるということ、虚しいことを言えば、それ以外何もないように思われた。けれども、夫は口で咥えて書いたとはいえ、腕がある人と同じ行動をとった。四肢だけではなく、

心がある人間のように、

妻を「ユルス」と。

Ⅲ Case3 「世界の卵という眼」

 見えない視線が、「美談」という幻想と空間を作り上げる。この時代の日本の「愛」というものが、どのあたりまで今日と共通しているのか私は把握できない。しかし、この二人が然程、遠い感覚ではないように思えるのは何故なのだろうか。それは現代の「自由恋愛」も 万全な幸福 でもなく人格者になれると言い切れないからなのかもしれない。恋愛は、幸福でもあるが相手を死へと追い詰めるほど罪悪なところもある。そもそも愛というものは、エーリッヒ・フロムでいえば「鍛錬」が必要となる。だからと言って、特に日本の古典文学を考えれば刹那的な愛を否定できない。なぜなら、それもリビドーであり、生命のエネルギーでもあるからである。

私から見える時子には、夫が愛おしい存在であったのには間違いはなかったと思う。愛おしいと性欲が共存するときに、主導権を握り始め、暴力的になっていく。着目すべきとろは、彼女は忘我していたわけではなく、そんな自分に気づいていたことだ。その罪悪感から改心することがでず、見えない世間の批判に怯えるようになっていった。夫の眼を潰してしまった後に、彼の胸に「ユルシテ」と指で何度も書いた。 乱歩は、これまで妻の内観と共に闇へ闇へ、快楽、恐怖と駆け足で転げ落ちていったが、妻がユルシを乞うところから妻が闇に落ちることが静止している。読者によっては妻が改心をして「ユルシテ」と言っているようにも見えるし、自己中心的に自分が許されたいがために「ユルシテ」と言っているだけのようにも見せている。

同時に時子は泣き出し、世の常の姿を備えた人間が見たくなり、哀れな夫を置き去りにする。一人に耐え兼ねて逃げ出したのだ。夫婦と恋愛を切り離して考えるひとも多いが、人間同士の愛には愛憎や、負の感情も避けられないのだから、私は切り離して考えない。妻は夫が愛おしいながらも、自分の欲に溺れていた。けれどもそれは美徳ではないというだけで、「愛」がないとも言い切れない。思い出だけが輝いていて、現在は見る影もないのも繋がりが切れているとは言えない。

人同士の繋がりが切れるとは、何処で決めるのだろうか。夫婦にも離婚やカトリックでも婚姻無効訴訟があるが、過去の記憶が生き続ける間、その過去は何処へ行くのだろうか。

それは死者との繋がりにも言えることである。違うのは死者との思い出はある一点で静止し、死者もある一点で変化を止めてしまう。「記録」を愛することができる。「記憶」は色々と思惑によって視点を変え、想像と創造的に流動的となって、様々な解釈を得て、死者への想いは生き続ける。それとは別にお互い生きている場合の「変化」はまた困難を極めている。特に愛していると言い切れなくなっていった場合、その対象は疎ましくも思うのかもしれない。そうなると未婚の場合は別れるという選択をするのが普通だが、結婚となると話は変わってしまう。現在の法律では「離婚」は認められているが、そこまで至った人間同士の絆を簡単に語ることはできない。 裁判を経て二度と会わないと決まった二人でもそれなりに何処かに心の隅には愛の残滓はあるものだ。「芋虫」の夫婦に話を戻すが、夫婦の絆はどれほどあったのか、私は、妻は「ユルシテ」と背中に書き続けたところに感じた。

日本人なら子どもの頃に、友人同士で背中や手のひらに文字を指で書いて何て書いているのか当てるゲームを一度はしたことがあるだろう。受け取り側は、単純な平仮名やカタカナでないと分かりにくい。特に身体が弱っているときに、本当に妻の言葉は通じていたのだろうか。 読み取る力というのも、一つの信頼関係も要する。もしかしたら、目の大怪我で皮膚全体の感覚は麻痺していたのかもしれない。身体が本当に万全に言葉を受け止めていたのか、それこそ信用が無いのだ。それでも、夫は最後に「ユルス」と書き残した。

もしかしたら、言葉は伝わっていなかったのかもしれない。

私はそう思うからこそ、夫の最期の「ユルス」に魂の重さを感じずにはいられないのだ。

魂の重さ、そこには上辺だけの愛情では計り知れないものがある。

対話というものは、通常でも成り立たないことがある。本人の聞きたいように、相手の言葉を受け取ってしまうことだってある。単純に「ユルシテ」という言葉を言われるだけで、被害者は自分が受けた仕打ちを考えれば聞きたくない言葉にだってなりえた。  男女の間に起こる刺激は常に秩序によって整っているわけでは無い。何処までが愛情だといえて、何処からが単なる刺激なのか簡単に説明出来るものではない。男女の間では、演繹的に「愛」だと確信出来ることもあれば、帰納的に「男女だから」としか言えないときもある。 どんな男女でもこの両方を兼ねているだろう。

この二人の関係性を、「現世」で断ち切ることは、夫の自害となった。そうしなければならなかった衝動を説明することは容易ではない。

ショーペンハウワーは、「自殺について」という書籍でラテン語のpunctum saliens (Engl. the salient point) について「世界の卵という眼」とした。punctum saliensとは訳が難しいが、直訳すれば小さな穴のような源泉という意味である。使われ方としては、「彼」の場合はこうだった。人間的な欲望や、人間愛などの現象の展開と対照的に、人間の生殖行為がある。それを彼の哲学では、最高度の焦点として意志の核心としている。どのような時代背景があろうとも、愛や意志などの変化に微動だにしないのは、神のような「神聖」なものを巡って、繰り広げられる現象に人間としての機能である「小さな穴のような源泉」として、生殖行為は対照としてある。これは否定できない事実だろう。

もう一人、punctum saliensについて書いていた哲学者がいる。それがシモーヌ・ヴェイユだった。「重力と恩寵」の脱創造の章で彼女は、「人間には架空の神聖が与えられたこと」

そして、「人生には、完全に裸で純粋な瞬間は二度しかない」としている。生まれる時と死ぬ時とし、自己の内部を徹底的に探求することによって、自己を取り去ろうとしている。

ショーペンハウワーとシモーヌ・ヴェイユのpunctum saliensを巡って、共通項を取り除くと、不穏で、愛とも期待外れとも言える暗い眼差しが現象として取り巻いている。人間の存在や、不在、私たちは匿名の観察者となっていく。乱歩自身は「夢を語る私の性格は現実世界からどのような扱いを受けても一向に痛痒を感じないのである」(政治的意味について)と言ったようだが、本当にその通りで、この話は特に主観的な視点と、主題が揺れ動いていては現象としてのPantasma(ドイツ語)がある。Einbildung(自由奔放な想像)と違ってPantasmaの空想は知覚と感覚の関係と平行である。この芋虫は、ただの妄想に過ぎない話ではなく、時代の価値観を越えて、夫婦の愛についても問題定義をしようとしているのか? それだけでなく、やはりこれは時子が夫の死後も芋虫の幻影を見ていたように、幻想譚なのだ。

夫婦二人が抱えたものは、生と死、全ての現象の合間を潜り抜けた源泉、人間の「原罪」とも言える、 関係が終わっても、生死の別れがあっても、記憶が如何に忘却され美化されようとも、

世界の卵と言える眼を中心として、人間を営んでいる。

Ⅳ  Case4 幻想・対話・美談 

 夫婦の対話のすれ違いについては、聖書の「雅歌」に5章にこのような話がある。花嫁は花婿への愛が冷めてしまい、花婿が扉を開けて欲しいと言っても開けようとしなくなった。花婿が熱心に花嫁に扉の向こうで尽くしているうちに、漸く花嫁は扉を開けたが、花婿は既に居なくなっていた。「あの方の言葉で、私は気が遠くなりました。私は探し求めましたが、あの方は答えてくれません」(5:6) 聖書の教えでは「花婿」が主に置き換えられるように、愛によって繋がった関係には主のような繋がりを求め、すれ違う。時子と夫はこのように、対話がすれ違っていた可能性があった。今の日本の「愛」の価値観は違うとは言っても、美談と「主(神)」は無関係ではないことは、現代の「愛」にも通じるものがある。愛とは、それだけの理知的なものを人は誓おうとする。その一つが「忠誠心」である。宗教上でなくても、家同士の契約だったとしても永遠の絆や忠誠心が求められる。お互い助け合い、常に見えないところでも気づいてくれているという期待と共に共存する。お互いを理解し、尊重すること、互いの違いを認めつつ、包容力も必要となっていく。理解よりも早く愛があるように、いな、愛と言える前に「善」が働くように、幸福追求のための努力が求められる。それでも、裏切り続ける詐欺師のようで、忠誠を誓いたいという理性もまた人間の魂なのかもしれない。

「芋虫」となった夫は、四肢のない状態で、口で筆記具を使ってカタカナで「ユルス」と書いた。それは日本語のカタカナだからこそ出来た技だった。英訳のforgiveでは四肢がない状態で書き残すことは困難で果たせない。もしも妻がなんて書いていたのか、夫が判っていなかった場合でも、彼の中での理解があったとするのならどうだろうか。雅歌の夫婦のように言葉や尽くしたって対話がすれ違うのが当たり前の中で、そうだったとするのなら、どうだろうか。もしくは、妻の言葉を聞き入れたとしたのなら、尚、その「対話」とは愛において「理想」なのだ。対話を受け取るのは「言葉」と限らないことでもあるが、意志や心を表すのには、言葉を最後は要する。それを夫はよく理解していた。妻に残されたのは、夫の幻影となる、「芋虫」が毎年「春」になると現れるという贖罪だろう。

人間とは、人間の情とは絶望的でありながら、接してみないとわからない宝がある。

乱歩は私のことも錯視へと陥らせる。わたくしの語りの着地点を何度も悩ませた。

「芋虫」という奇談、夫の許し、軍人としての死、乱歩作品の中で私の中では一番の名作となっている。結局は、生死を境に二人の関係は途切れたが、妻の時子には芋虫を見るたびに思い出すだろう。私は、一時期は人格が歪みながらも、「形」が変わってしまっても妻は夫だけを見ていて、夫も妻のために生きた、

この話を「一途」な愛と忠誠とすら錯覚した。

「一途?」 いやいや、これは奇談なのだ。やはりこれは奇談なのだ。

最後まで「美談」という一本筋を通したような話だった。

Hans Christian Andersen, ‘Skyggen’.

Calm down, listen till the end. I was in the right place. I have had sight of all the truth that is in sight.

Hans Christian Andersen, 'Skyggen'.
  1. First
  2. Ⅰ Personality and personas
  3. Ⅱ  Plato and the ‘shadow’.
  4. Ⅲ ’Uniqueness’ and monads.
  5. Last Lazarus of Bethany

First

“Sooner or later, you will die.” When the shadow uttered these words, the scholar must have taken them as a reference to some distant point in time, unaware that death was, in fact, looming near.

During his travels to the sweltering countries, the people he encountered acquired a complexion like mahogany. Mahogany, perhaps not the easiest colour to picture, is a rich, deep reddish-brown, often seen in finely crafted furniture.

The scholars dedicated their studies to the pursuit of ‘truth, goodness, and beauty.’ Those scholars, along with their shadows, found it impossible to endure the oppressive heat of the day and would wait for the relief of nightfall to stretch out and rest. One evening, the scholar fell hopelessly in love with a woman on a nearby balcony, where beautiful flowers bloomed, and music seemed to take root in the air.

As his shadow stretched over to the edge of the woman’s balcony, he playfully instructed it, “Go on, slip into her room and keep her company.” Bowing slightly, the scholar directed the shadow toward the woman’s chamber, adding with a sly smile, “Even you, shadow, should make yourself useful now and then.” To his surprise, the shadow obeyed—and vanished altogether.

The scholar grew restless in the absence of his shadow, but he continued his work on his manuscript. Strangely, it seemed there were precedents in this fictional world where shadows disappeared, with similar tales existing even in colder climates.

Then, one day, a knock came at his door. Standing before him was a well-dressed gentleman. The scholar stared, utterly puzzled, unable to place the man’s face.

The man smiled and spoke: “I am the one who used to be your shadow.”

Ⅰ Personality and personas

Andersen’s era preceded the development of Jungian and Freudian psychology, yet the concept of persona bears similarities to those later theories. While the word ‘persona’ is sometimes associated with divine aspects—such as roles within the Christian Trinity—it also refers to the human self, which is unified as one.

The term persona originates from the Latin word meaning ‘mask,’ which itself derives from a Greek word for ‘face.’ In its earliest usage, it referred to the masks worn by actors on stage. Over time, however, it came to denote not the physical mask but the role the actor played. In this way, it is easy to see parallels between the idea of the Christian Trinity—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—as three distinct roles that ultimately unite as one.

For Jung, the shadow represents repressed aspects of the psyche and takes an Aristotelian form. By contrast, Plato projected the concept outward, focusing on the ideal form of truth. Jung’s framework, in which the unconscious represents unachieved aspects of the self, offers an interesting lens through which to view Andersen’s tale. As a work of art, the story endows the scholar with an externalised, autonomous shadow, representing not merely an unconscious element but a fully embodied being.

In Andersen’s time, scholars were enraptured by the pursuit of the good, the beautiful, and the true. Yet the shadow in this story is not an unconscious reflection of the scholar’s mind—it is a conscious, embodied presence. To better understand this, one might consider Andersen’s own youthful ambition to become an opera singer. He longed to remain on the stage, if only his voice would transform to meet the demands of the role. This raises a curious question: is a role merely another facet of the self?

persona typically returns to unity as a single identity when not performing. However, a role demands more—it requires the actor to use their entire body and presence to become someone entirely different. On stage, identities shift with names, yet the performer remains inseparably linked to their true self. Even if one plays the role of a ‘scholar,’ that character is inherently fused with the actor’s underlying personality.

In The Shadow, one figure must always play the subject, while the other takes on the role of the shadow. As a ‘thinking entity’ that extends the human psyche, the shadow assumes multiple meanings. However, the shadow-actor in this story achieves happiness in a way the original form—the scholar—cannot. This suggests that the shadow’s identity transcends individual judgement, belonging more to the collective consciousness.

Indeed, the shadow belongs to society far more than the scholar does. It is the shadow that finds fulfilment by engaging with the group, suggesting that individuality must, at times, give way to collective identity.

Ⅱ  Plato and the ‘shadow’.

What exactly was the shadow to the scholar? The way in which the shadow detached itself and operated independently recalls Plato’s Allegory of the Cave. In this allegory, prisoners are confined within a cave, unable to see the fire burning behind them. All they perceive are the shadows of puppets, projected by the fire onto the walls before them. However, one prisoner manages to escape the cave and discovers that the world outside—illuminated by the sun—is the true reality. Upon returning to the cave to share his discovery, the other prisoners refuse to believe him, mistaking the shadows for the only truth they know.

Similarly, in Andersen’s tale, the scholar’s shadow takes on a life of its own, leaving the scholar’s side and venturing into the world. The departure of the shadow raises questions: was it truly a distinct being, or merely an alter ego of the scholar? Andersen deliberately obscures the connection between the two, leaving room for ambiguity. Upon the scholar’s return to the cold lands of his homeland, he discovers that a new shadow has emerged to replace the old one. Meanwhile, the original shadow, now freed from its former master, has pursued ‘outer truth’ and transformed into something magnificent.

In this altered state, the shadow presents itself to the scholar, appearing in splendid attire. Despite the transformation, the scholar warmly welcomes the shadow as though it were an entirely new personality. The reader may initially assume that the scholar and the shadow share a dual identity, but Andersen offers no such resolution. Instead, it becomes clear that the shadow has evolved into a completely independent entity, no longer tethered to the scholar.

“The most beautiful thing in the world is poetry,” the shadow declares, speaking of the woman the scholar had fallen in love with during his travels in the hot country. Through his connection with the woman, the shadow’s own sense of self is awakened. He begins to desire material comforts—shoes, clothes, and the kindness of others—and people take pity on him, offering him aid. Having enjoyed these indulgences, the shadow resumes its journey, continuing to explore the world on its own terms.

Plato’s philosophy, particularly in his dialogue Philebus, equates the concept of the Good with that of the One. He states: “It would do more harm than good if, having all other knowledge, one lacked knowledge of the highest Good.” The scholar represents an individual in pursuit of such ideals—truth, goodness, and beauty. However, in Andersen’s narrative, the shadow evolves into a separate existence entirely. It becomes a being that embodies these ideals not through intellectual pursuit, but through experience and interaction with the world.

Ⅲ ’Uniqueness’ and monads.

The shadow eventually returned to the scholar, who continued to write stories about ‘truth, goodness, and beauty.’ However, despite his efforts, the scholar made little progress in his career. At this stage, the shadow remained amicable and even suggested that they travel together. Yet, there was one condition: “You will be my shadow.” The scholar, unwilling to submit to such terms, flatly refused, saying, “I don’t want to do that.” He declined, even though the shadow offered to cover the travel expenses.

The ideals the scholar pursued—truth, goodness, and beauty—were, to most people, as meaningless as giving a rose to a cow. This sense of futility weighed heavily on the scholar, and he soon fell ill. When the shadow repeated his offer, proposing again that the scholar travel with him and become his shadow, the scholar—now weakened—reluctantly agreed.

At first, they got along well. However, their relationship shifted when the shadow raised the question of how they should address one another. The shadow insisted on addressing the scholar informally as ‘you’. This provoked the scholar, who retorted, “This is absurd.” His irritation grew: “It’s ridiculous that I must say ‘buggerlugs’ while he calls me ‘old bean’.”

This linguistic tension is particularly challenging to translate. In Danish, it is expressed as: “Det er dog vel galt,” tænkte han, “at jeg må sige De og han sige du, men nu måtte han holde ud.”

In this sentence, ‘De’ is a formal, respectful pronoun, while ‘du’ is a more familiar, personal one. The protagonist resents being addressed with the informal du—not merely because it implies familiarity, but because it reflects a shift in authority. The once-masterful scholar feels humiliated, now reduced to a subordinate role. This wordplay recalls the whimsical language of Lewis Carroll, but here it underscores the scholar’s existential crisis: the loss of his autonomy.

For someone devoted to the ideals of the Platonic school—where eidos (form) must remain within one’s grasp—the notion that a shadow could surpass him in influence is intolerable. In philosophy, where perception and understanding are traditionally the purview of the self, it is the self that ventures outside Plato’s cave to gain knowledge. Yet in Andersen’s tale, the scholar, despite his intellectual pursuits, is eclipsed by his shadow, who succeeds while he struggles even to complete his writing.

What, then, has the shadow taken from the scholar? Or perhaps the scholar, without realising it, has relinquished something vital to the shadow—an exchange that Andersen deliberately leaves unresolved.

At a resort, they encounter a beautiful princess afflicted with an unusual condition: she “sees things too clearly.” Intrigued by the shadow’s charm, she falls in love with him as they dance together. The shadow introduces the scholar as “the shadow who knows everything.” When the princess is told, “When you ask him questions, treat him like a human being,” she complies and poses many questions to the scholar. Impressed by the depth of the shadow, the princess decides to marry him, admiring the extraordinary qualities his ‘shadow’ (the scholar) possesses.

Despite this arrangement, the shadow turns to the scholar and says, “From now on, you will be my shadow.” Once more, the scholar refuses. However, on the day of the wedding, the scholar meets his tragic end, killed without fanfare or resistance.

Leibniz’s principle of sufficient reason asserts that every event must have a reason for occurring. The idea also implies that the existence of something—ratio in Latin—relies on clear cause and effect. Leibniz’s concept of the monad, representing unity, hinges on the presence of self-consciousness. To possess uniqueness, an individual must first be aware of themselves as a distinct entity. Perhaps Leibniz’s obsession with uniqueness stemmed from his scientific mind—after all, the observer and the object observed must both be understood with certainty. Where duality arises, certainty vanishes. Only by existing as both the observer and the observed can one claim true singularity.

This tension plays out in Andersen’s story: why could the scholar and the shadow not live as separate beings? Modern psychology might interpret the shadow as a manifestation of repressed aspects of the self. However, Andersen obscures the connection between the two characters, suggesting that the shadow transcends the scholar’s consciousness. Over time, the shadow integrates with the surrounding world—melding with the scholar’s cognition, soul, and persona. Notably, this transformation culminates in the marriage to the princess, a union symbolising monogamy, as prescribed by Christian tradition.

A similar theme appears in Andersen’s “The Goloshes of Fortune” (Lykkens Kalosker). In this tale, the story moves between cold and hot countries, explicitly named as Switzerland and Italy. The characters include a young servant called ‘Happiness’ and an old fairy named ‘Sorrow.’ Happiness, a servant to the goddess, carries joy wherever she goes. Sorrow, by contrast, works alone. On her birthday, Happiness receives a pair of magical boots, which grant any wish to their wearer. However, Sorrow warns that these boots may bring misfortune instead of joy.

The boots pass through several hands—a legal adviser, a night watchman, and a scribe—bringing each of them unexpected tragedy despite granting their wishes. Finally, the boots fall into the possession of a seminarian, who wishes to travel from the cold climate of Switzerland to the warmth of Italy. However, after some time, he tires of travel and blames his physical body for his fatigue. In a desperate wish, he asks to be freed from his body—and dies.

Two figures appear in the room where the seminarian lies. The Fairy of Sorrow turns to the Servant of Happiness and asks, “What happiness have you given him?” Happiness responds, “I believe I granted him eternal happiness, for he now sleeps peacefully.” Sorrow, however, disagrees: “He died by his own will, so he was not summoned.”

Sorrow then offers the seminarian grace. She removes the boots, and the young man is revived. At the same moment, the Fairy of Sorrow disappears, taking the boots with her. In the end, the boots—intended to bring happiness—belong to Sorrow.

The scholar’s death in The Shadow parallels the seminarian’s near-fatal journey. Both characters fail to recognise their true gifts—those destined for them by fate. Andersen’s story is ultimately about missed opportunities and the consequences of not understanding oneself. However, unlike The Goloshes of FortuneThe Shadow refrains from explicitly addressing human experiences such as sorrow or happiness. Instead, the shadow’s meaning remains ambiguous, open to multiple interpretations.

Leibniz argued that not everything possible is realised—possibilities remain unrealised, existing merely as potential. Reality emerges from countless unrealised possibilities. Drawing on Leibniz’s ideas of reason and chance, the scholar’s death in The Shadow might be seen as a tragic accident born of ignorance. This echoes the Greek concept of tyche (luck)—a force beyond human control.

While Leibniz and Plato shared an interest in the nature of ideas, Leibniz’s philosophy diverged from Descartes’ by asserting that ideas are not merely subjective but inherently representational. The scholar’s pursuit of truth, goodness, and beauty reflects his belief in these ideals. Yet, like Leibniz, the scholar fails to reach the ultimate realisation of these truths in his lifetime. His failure lies not in his intellectual pursuits but in neglecting to recognise the shadow as part of himself—a unique, indivisible being.

Andersen’s story leaves us with a tantalising question: Was the shadow truly the ‘opposite of good,’ or something more nuanced? This ambiguity draws us closer to later psychological interpretations of shadows and personas, leaving us to ponder the elusive nature of selfhood.

Last Lazarus of Bethany

The shadow, like a prisoner released from Plato’s cave, ventured into the world and uncovered many truths. It must have been a journey towards becoming whole, to achieve oneness without being recognised. In this tale, the shadow represents yet another persona—an extension of the author’s reflections on themes such as marriage, a recurring motif in Andersen’s fairy tales. Here, the coexistence of two beings—scholar and shadow—becomes impossible, as they cannot remain united within a singular form, an Eidos. The shadow believed this was his moment of triumph, but the scholars could not bring themselves to accept it.

Andersen’s personal longing for the stage runs through this story. Yet, from an actor’s perspective, we might wonder: was there ever truly a ‘shadow’? Could it be that the scholar played every role, not through a split personality but simply as a man in search of meaning, travelling endlessly to understand the world? This would explain his failure to complete the manuscript on truth, goodness, and beauty. He was too preoccupied with his journey to attend to his work. The room remained empty, the manuscript neglected. Perhaps, like an empty tomb, there was no princess, no wedding—only absence.

And yet, in Andersen’s world, death cannot be a void. Death must be present, for the actor must bow at the end of the play and return to unity—the One. After enduring life’s cruelty, which version of the self takes the final bow before the curtain falls?

In The Goloshes of Fortune, the seminarian, guided by the Fairy of Sorrow (Sorgen), is given a second chance at life. The scholar, however, has no such guide. Why did the scholar lack a companion like Sorrow? What meaning lies within this omission? Could it reflect Andersen’s own fear—not just of death, but of a life without mourning, without sorrow to give meaning to loss? Perhaps the one who did not mourn the scholar’s death was, unmistakably, the scholar himself.

Andersen’s stories frequently contemplate the deaths of the poor. His sensitivity to death was deeply personal, permeating his narratives. The seminarians in The Goloshes of Fortune reflect both Andersen’s hopes and his fears—hence, their resurrection. In contrast, the death of the scholar in The Shadow seems to signal acceptance, as though Andersen were embracing death’s inevitability.

What makes The Shadow a profoundly melancholic tale is that it offers no miracles, no divine intervention. Jesus wept at the death of Lazarus, but here, there are no such tears—no prayers to resurrect the fallen. Yet, those who read Andersen’s fairy tales may recognise his hidden persona: a voice suggesting that happiness can only be found in death. Perhaps the scholar’s tragedy lies in the many things he neglected while still alive. And in the end, faced with life’s cruelties, Andersen might have hoped that his readers, like Jesus, would feel righteous indignation, that they too would mourn such losses with tears.

It is here, in this sorrow, that we find the thread of sanctity running through Andersen’s work—the sense that life, even in its frailty, holds profound meaning. I cannot help but imagine that this is how the author himself appears when he has fulfilled his role: a persona complete in its purpose.

Remember, Jesus always mourns your death. Whenever you feel your worth slipping away, whenever you believe your death would make no difference, know that there is someone who loves you enough to grieve your loss.

When he heard this, Jesus said, “This sickness will not end in death. No, it is for God’s glory, so that God’s Son may be glorified through it.” – John 11:4

When my persona can no longer return to unity,

I pray that, as the curtain falls, I may return to this heart.

*The English translations of the quotations are original.

Lykkens Kalosker       http://wayback-01.kb.dk/wayback/20101108104438/http://www2.kb.dk/elib/lit/dan/andersen/eventyr.dsl/hcaev021.htm

WordPress.com でブログを始める.

ページ先頭へ ↑