In this context, it seems reasonable to conclude that Weil is referring to the Catholic Eucharist, or Eucharistia hostia. This is, of course, an intuitive conjecture, yet it remains plausible to suggest that Weil maintained a critical perspective towards the monotonous and arduous nature of factory labour. Moreover, she implies that the hostia has been reduced to a mere habit—an observation aligned with her critique of the increasing materialism and secularisation of the Church. I argue that this insight emerged from her personal experience as a labourer, leading her to realise that the act of consuming food and drink, devoid of the accompanying physical effort, could be seen as a more materialistic pursuit.
My preference for Weil, over many other philosophers and theologians, lies in her focused exploration of the condition of the ‘labourer’. Furthermore, her spiritual ‘turns’, which many find challenging to interpret, are consistently anchored in the figure of Jesus Christ. The issue of poverty tied to labour remains a pervasive and universal challenge, even in modern contexts. It is also worth noting that Jesus himself had a profound connection to labour, given that Joseph, his foster father, was a carpenter.
＊＊＊
・Travail manuel. Pourquoi n’y a-t-il jamais eu un mystique ouvrier ou paysan qui ait écrit sur l’usage du dégoût du travail ? La pesanteur et la grâce
・（Manual labour. Why has there never been a labourer or peasant mystic who wrote about the experience of disgust towards work?）
・Travail manuel. Le temps qui entre dans le corps. Par le travail l’homme se fait matière comme le Christ par l’Eucharistie. Le travail est comme une mort.
（Manual labour. Time enters the body through labour. Through work, man becomes matter, just as Christ becomes matter through the Eucharist. Labour is akin to death.）
＊＊＊
This assertion appears in Gravity and Grace (La pesanteur et la grâce), where Weil reflects on the mystery of labour, drawing a parallel between work and the transformation that Christ undergoes in the Eucharist. This connection evokes Christ’s anguished cry from the cross: “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?”—an expression of divine abandonment. Christ suffered fully as a human being, and conveying the meaning behind these beliefs can be profoundly challenging. Faith is often deeply intuitive and internal, making it difficult to articulate through rational discourse alone. From a Catholic perspective, reflecting on why one might embrace Catholicism involves recognising the inherent contradictions within the institution, which may serve as part of its appeal.
In early Christianity, the teachings of Jesus were transmitted orally and through personal encounters, embodying a distinctly spiritual and individual approach to faith. As the Church’s influence expanded within the Roman Empire, however, faith became increasingly institutionalised, with doctrines and rituals formalised over time. This evolution established faith as an entity rooted in institutional authority, often intertwined with political power. Catholicism continues to value mystery and intuition, yet these elements have also been absorbed into its institutional framework. Although Weil’s exact reasons for embracing Catholicism remain unknown, I believe it was the very contradictions within the faith that captivated her. Amidst the materialism and corruption that taints some members of the clergy, she found solace in her connection with the humanitarian Fr Perrin. When I challenged Fr Perrin on the Church’s practice of excommunication, he replied in writing, comparing it to an act of weeping. Regrettably, this letter never reached Weil.
Weil recounts three significant encounters with Catholicism following her factory experience. The first occurred in a small Portuguese village, where she witnessed fishermen’s wives singing sorrowful hymns. This encounter led her to perceive Christianity as a “religion of slaves,” realising that those who suffer need faith for solace—and that she, too, was one of these “slaves.” The second encounter took place in Assisi in 1937, where, for the first time, she knelt in a small chapel associated with St Francis, experiencing a profound reverence for God. She also immersed herself in the liturgy at Solesmes, enduring severe headaches but finding comfort in the beauty of the hymns and words. These experiences offered her a glimpse into the possibility of understanding divine love beyond human suffering, etching the Passion of Christ deeply into her spiritual consciousness.
For her third encounter, Weil committed to reciting the Lord’s Prayer (Pater) in Greek each morning with complete focus. During these prayers, she often experienced a profound silence, sometimes feeling as though her thoughts transcended her physical body, enabling her to sense the loving presence of Christ. This practice of prayer became a vital means of direct contact with the divine for her. Her engagement with Catholicism left a significant imprint on her thoughts and beliefs.
The term “Catholicism” in this context encompasses the formal doctrines, rituals, and institutions of the Catholic Church, along with its social and cultural impact. The Pope is viewed as the supreme authority, and Catholicism emphasises the institutional and public dimensions of tradition-based education and social action. It can be described as an “outward-looking” phenomenon, centred on the officially recognised doctrines and institutions of the Roman Catholic Church. Although personal “intuition” remains vital for practising Catholics, it is noteworthy that Weil—despite her deep involvement—never received baptism, or passed away before she could do so, suggesting that her spirituality transcended institutional boundaries.
Weil’s factory experience allowed her to empathise with the suffering of others and to recognise herself as a “slave.” This realisation profoundly shaped her spirit, leading her to see herself as an anonymous figure within society, much like Christ, who bore the weight of human suffering.
The Psalms of the Old Testament offer a poetic connection between God and humanity, expressing a spectrum of emotions through praise, prayer, and lament. Other biblical texts, such as the Song of Solomon, Job, Proverbs, Lamentations, and sections of Jeremiah and Isaiah, also contain poetic elements. However, the New Testament does not portray Jesus Christ in poetic form.
Why, then, is Jesus not praised through poetry? This absence may reflect the early Christian focus on spreading the faith and establishing communities within the material world. The practical need to communicate teachings clearly and accessibly took precedence over poetic expression, leaving any poetic sentiment about Jesus to the reader’s interpretation. The narrative structure and instructive parables used in the Gospels were essential for conveying the message to diverse audiences across different cultures and languages.
In this context, Weil’s concept of the ‘labourer’ serves as a symbolic connection to Jesus. It is not merely physical sustenance that labourers require, but rather the nourishment of the soul and imagination.
Even today, the issues surrounding poverty and labour are not easily categorised as either social problems or matters of personal responsibility; they remain deeply intertwined, presenting challenges without clear solutions. Viewing poetry solely as an act of creative expression reflects a subjective perspective, reminiscent of Plato’s theories. However, my focus has been on Weil’s engagement with Catholicism, despite her not being baptised.
Can we view labourers not as mere material beings but as individuals who share in Christ’s suffering?
While the hostia, representing Christ’s flesh, may exist within sacred rituals, it is undeniable that institutional corruption often reduces it to mere bread. Labourers need more than this—they require a poetic sentiment capable of inspiring and enriching their lives. Historically, poetry has expressed devotion and reverence towards God, articulating moral and ethical ideals. To what extent, though, can humanity embrace such ideals today?
Weil does not deny the necessity of bread in addressing physical hunger; rather, she distinguishes between this and the spiritual nourishment she seeks. Her writings call for a deeper exploration of suffering and the human experience, frequently referencing Jesus Christ as a guiding figure. In doing so, she reveals a profound religious intuition that underpins her perspectives on contradiction and transformation.
Ⅷ. Reflections
Perhaps you may glimpse poetic sentiment in the theme of ‘light and shadow.’ I wonder what thoughts stir within you as you observe the shadows cast by trees and the way light dances upon an outdoor wall. The delicate interplay between light and shadow conjures countless associations. Shadows, it could be said, are ephemeral—born from the presence of light, yet perpetually shifting and fleeting. If we draw upon Plato’s allegory of the cave, we might surmise that what we perceive as reality is but a shadow of the true essence, a projection on the wall that we mistake for the real. This enchanting scene offers only a fragment of truth, revealing but a glimpse of a larger whole.
In Japanese thought, this interplay evokes the concept of mujo—impermanence—capturing the transient meeting and parting of light and shadow. In Japanese literature, cherishing such seemingly insignificant moments is, in itself, a literary act. Gaston Bachelard, for his part, refrained from naming such experiences, instead drawing profound meaning from the essence of the fleeting moment.
While some may interpret this view as offering solace to labourers, my perspective has been shaped by Christian evangelism. Light and shadow, deeply symbolic throughout tradition, reveal beauty wherever the heart is open to see it. Yet if we are to embrace the full scope of Weil’s reflections on ‘labour,’ we must look beyond the mere interplay of light and shadow. We are called to confront the very symbol of ‘labour’ itself, not in its economic sense, but as a representation of poverty. Symbols, which merge the tangible with the abstract, demand both conceptual understanding and authentic engagement with reality.
One might say that while poetic sentiment grants us a certain freedom, we must also tread the path of poverty that Jesus embodies.
In Matthew 25:40, Jesus offers a parable that illuminates his royal worthiness: “Whatever you did for one of the least of my brethren, you did for me.” Conversely, he warns, “What you did not do for one of these least, you did not do for me.” These words convey that service to the most vulnerable is, in essence, service to Jesus himself. Yet bound within this message are daunting challenges, tangled with complexity, leading us away from the realm of poetry and heartfelt inspiration.
Indeed, those who place their faith in Jesus Christ may encounter moments of profound intuition, a deep sense of spiritual insight. Yet to articulate the poverty that Jesus embraced, and to share its meaning with others, is no easy task. The human heart, it seems, is caught in tension—yearning to draw nearer to the divine mystery, while fearing to lose itself within it. In recognising my own impermanence, I discover within myself a compassion tinged with humility—a challenge that mirrors my understanding of Jesus. This reflection becomes the essence of my redemption: not a pursuit of abstract beauty, but of a beauty that longs to take tangible form.
Amid the complexities of doctrine and the mysteries of faith, I have anchored my thoughts in the figure of the ‘labourer.’ Honouring Joseph, the earthly father of Jesus, I pay tribute to Simone Weil, whose words resonate with this enduring theme. Through her eloquence, Jesus walks the landscape of the heart, emerging as a poetic sentiment. Though the New Testament does not portray Jesus in the language of poetry, it was perhaps Weil who most profoundly conveyed that the journey to discover this poetic truth lies within us.
Lastly, I have chosen to translate “Work” consistently as “Labour.” In English, “Labour” encompasses not only work but also the pains of childbirth, whereas French distinguishes between these meanings with different words. For Weil, however, the shared Latin root may have embodied a deeper connection. She left us with these poignant words in her notebooks: “Writing is akin to childbirth. One cannot help but strive to the point of feeling limits.” This is an experience familiar to anyone who has engaged deeply in writing, regardless of their grasp of Latin. Yet knowing Weil, it is likely she uncovered within this act a profound mystery.
In this light, perhaps she was indeed a ‘teacher’ in the truest and most profound sense.
Comments:
＊Although this work does not engage with Kantian thought, it is possible to reflect elements of Kant’s philosophy.
＊Les travailleurs ont besoin de poésie plus que de pain is part of the “Workers and Mysteries” chapter in Gravity and Grace, and it continues with Seule la religion peut être la source de cette poésie. (Only religion can be the source of this poetry).
＊I hope you will accept this critique, even though it references literature. While it does not mention Kantian thought, it can reflect it as well.
＊Les travailleurs ont besoin de poésie plus que de pain appears in the “Workers and Mysteries” chapter of Gravity and Grace, followed by Seule la religion peut être la source de cette poésie. (Only religion can be the source of this poetry).
References:
• Simone Weil 『La pesanteur et la grâce』『La Condition ouvrière』『Attente de Dieu』『La pesanteur et la grâce』
• Tome VI, volume 2, Cahiers 2 (septembre 1941- février 1942), Paris, Gallimard, 1997.
• George G. Humphreys, Taylorism in France, 1904-1920: The Impact of Scientific Management on Factory Relations and Society
• Plato / Allen, R. (TRN), 『The Republic』
• 暗い時代の三人の女性, 晃洋書房
• シモーヌヴェイユ アンソロジー, 河出出版
Please note that, as of now, this paper does not provide references to literature specifically addressing Catholic sacraments. The relevant details will be submitted at a later date.
・Travail manuel. Le temps qui entre dans le corps. Par le travail l’homme se fait matière comme le Christ par l’Eucharistie. Le travail est comme une mort.
＊Les travailleurs ont besoin de poésie plus que de pain.は重力と恩寵の「労働者と神秘」の章であり、Seule la religion peut être la source de cette poésie.この詩の源になれるのは宗教だけだ、と続きがあります。
＊I hope you will accept this critique, even though it refers to literature. While it does not mention Kantian thought, it can also reflect.
＊*Les travailleurs ont besoin de poésie plus que de pain. is the ‘Workers and Mysteries’ chapter of Gravity and Grace, and Seule la religion peut être la source de cette poésie. only religion can be the source of this poem. It continues with.
参照文献
Simone Weil 『La pesanteur et la grâce』『La Condition ouvrière』『Attente de Dieu』『La pesanteur et la grâce』
Tome VI, volume 2, Cahiers 2 (septembre 1941- février 1942), Paris, Gallimard, 1997.
George G. Humphreys『Taylorism in France, 1904-1920: The Impact of Scientific Management on Factory Relations and Society
Simone Weil’s life and philosophy were characterised by numerous intricate twists, as reflected in her writings, which offer a breadth of interpretations that often elude certainty as to whether she herself foresaw them. Her notebooks comprise a collection of fragmented reflections, which, after her death, were organised, edited, and published by her friends and fellow believers. Among her works, the celebrated Gravity and Grace (La pesanteur et la grâce) stands as a masterpiece, owing in no small part to the editorial contributions of Gustave Thibon.
The recurrent themes of ‘turning points’ and ‘contradictions’ in her philosophy, I argue, demonstrate a persistent consistency throughout Weil’s thought, especially in relation to her spiritual quest and profound engagement with Jesus Christ. Weil’s exploration of Jesus Christ led her to confront numerous religious and philosophical questions, which, I believe, served as a central axis that imparted coherence to her seemingly disparate transformations. Her efforts to reconcile faith with reason, and to deepen her understanding of life’s inherent suffering, demand thoughtful reflection, no matter how often one revisits them.
For me, engaging with her work remains an enduring source of profound joy.
Ⅱ.Premonition
In 1932–1933, a year before beginning her work in a factory, Simone Weil travelled to Germany to gain deeper insight into the foundations of fascism. In a letter dated 20 August, she observed that the Nazi Party had garnered support not only from the petit bourgeoisie but also from a significant number of unemployed individuals and other vulnerable groups. Although her stay in Berlin lasted just over two months, she retained vivid impressions of the city’s atmosphere. Former engineers struggled to obtain even a cold meal, yet no military personnel were visible on the streets.
At that time, Germany was grappling with widespread unemployment and severe hardship. In 1942, Weil confided in a letter to Father Perrin, with whom she shared a close relationship, expressing an inner conflict: “I know that if twenty German youths were to sing a Nazi song in unison before me at this moment, a part of my soul would instantly resonate with that of the Nazis. This is my profound vulnerability, yet it is how I exist.”
Upon her return from Germany, her analysis of the country encountered criticism from orthodox Marxists. Nevertheless, she endeavoured to support German exiles to the fullest extent possible.
Ⅲ .Turning Points and Contradictions
In his book Strength to Love, Martin Luther King Jr. draws on a quote attributed to a French philosopher, asserting that “a person who lacks a clear and prominent antithesis in their character is not strong.” However, the identity of the philosopher in question remains uncertain. King frequently invoked philosophical concepts in his speeches and writings, often referring to thinkers like Hegel to emphasise the necessity of balancing opposing forces to achieve harmony and progress. Hegel’s notion that truth emerges through the synthesis of thesis and antithesis aligns with King’s message of deriving strength and understanding through the reconciliation of differences and unity. Moreover, King observed that Jesus also preached about the fusion of opposites, as seen in his admonition: “I am sending you out like sheep among wolves,” and the instruction to “be wise as serpents and innocent as doves.” Although this teaching is undoubtedly demanding, it reflects the expectations that Jesus placed on his followers.
That said, Hegel was a German philosopher, which raises the question: which French philosopher might King have been referencing? Given the period, Gaston Bachelard is a plausible candidate. However, I argue that Simone Weil is equally likely. In late 1934, having resigned from her teaching post, Weil began working as a press operator in a factory, driven by a determination to confront the demands of the “real world.” Before embarking on this factory work, she had been preoccupied with the idea of creating “masterpieces” and “posthumous works.” Yet, the ideals she cherished proved difficult to sustain in the face of the harsh realities of factory life. She reflected on these experiences, recording: “I can’t help but think that interchangeable parts are like labourers. The parts seem to have more citizenship than we do,” as she entered the factory gate, displaying her numbered ID.
Simone Weil left behind a pivotal statement that encapsulates her philosophy: “What labourers need is not bread, but poetry.” During her time in Germany, she observed the plight of the unemployed and expressed her feelings of inadequacy to Father Perrin. The contradictions she grappled with in her philosophical and theological inquiries reflect the inherent complexity of human existence. Indeed, the notion that human essence is fundamentally complex has been explored by philosophers long before the advent of psychology. Plato’s tripartite conception of the soul and Aristotle’s examination of human nature in relation to logical virtues laid the foundation for this discourse. The exploration of human reason, emotion, and self-awareness evolved through the works of philosophers such as Descartes, Kant, and Hegel during the Middle Ages and Renaissance, expanding our understanding of the human mind. In the modern era, Freud’s scientific approach marked a critical turning point in this tradition.
Returning to Simone Weil, her assertion that “What labourers need is not bread, but poetry.” might appear paradoxical when juxtaposed with the brutal conditions of factory work. In such an environment, uncovering beauty and poetry presents a profound challenge. This tension echoes Hegel’s dialectic of thesis and antithesis. However, Weil’s philosophy, I contend, offers a distinctive perspective that requires deeper engagement with the complexities of the human spirit and psyche.
Weil also recognised that poetry could seem irrelevant to labourers, given the harshness of their daily struggles. She herself experienced the exhaustion and disillusionment intrinsic to physically demanding labour. Her philosophical explorations, particularly those rooted in biblical engagement, reflected the inner turmoil she faced. She even recorded that her distress in the factory was so overwhelming that she contemplated suicide by throwing herself into the River Seine.
Weil’s intellectual transitions and fragmented thoughts seem to form an inclusio structure, wherein statements that appear contradictory—much like the reflections of Koheleth in the Old Testament—gain coherence when examined in relation to one another. While Weil acknowledged that artistic expression had little relevance in the context of labour, she also explored the interplay between timepieces and artistry. She remarked that a clock, even when crafted with precision, functions without love, whereas a work of art requires love to resonate meaningfully. One may wonder why Weil insisted that “What labourers need is not bread, but poetry.” Even if we were to systematically outline the logical implications of her statement, conveying the mental state induced by labour at that time remains an arduous task.
I intend to unravel this challenge in my own way.
Ⅳ ouvrière and ouvrier
The direct translation of Simone Weil’s La Condition ouvrière is The Condition of the Labourer. The term ouvrière refers to female labourers, and in this work, Weil distinguishes between ouvrière and ouvrier, using the former to denote female labourers, including herself, and the latter to refer to male labourers. This distinction follows standard French grammatical conventions.
-mais jusqu’à quel point tout cela résisterait-il à la longue ? – Je ne suis pas loin de conclure que le salut de l’âme d’un ouvrier dépend d’abord de sa constitution physique.-
I am close to concluding that the salvation of a labourer’s soul depends primarily on their physical constitution.” While this idea is subjective, her use of ouvrier reflects an awareness of the collective and universal role of labourers. This distinction thus signifies both the importance of individual existence and a broader, societal perspective.
“mais jusqu’à quel point tout cela résisterait-il à la longue ? – Je ne suis pas loin de conclure que le salut de l’âme d’un ouvrier dépend d’abord de sa constitution physique. Je ne vois pas comment ceux qui ne sont pas costauds peuvent éviter de tomber dans une forme quelconque de désespoir – soûlerie, ou vagabondage, ou crime, ou débauche, ou simplement, et bien plus souvent, abrutissement – (et la religion ?). La révolte est impossible, sauf par éclairs (je veux dire même à titre de sentiment). D’abord, contre quoi ?”On est seul avec son travail, on ne pourrait se révolter que contre lui –La Condition ouvrière Simone Weil
Next, we turn to:
“But to what extent would all this endure over time? I am close to concluding that the salvation of a worker’s soul depends primarily on their physical constitution. I cannot see how those who are not robust can avoid falling into some form of despair—whether it be drunkenness, vagrancy, crime, debauchery, or simply, and far more often, stupefaction—and what of religion? Revolt is impossible, except in fleeting moments (even as a feeling). First, against what? One is alone with their work; one could only rebel against it.”
Weil’s expressive power is paradoxically revealed through her encounter with the flower of evil, exemplified by her exposure to the Bessarabo Affair (l’affaire Bessarabo) in 1920, when a man was murdered by his wife, and his body transported by train. This incident reflects the human longing for goodness, even in the midst of moral decay. Weil argues that the concept of sainthood—particularly of a female saint—is ultimately flawed. She possessed the strength to maintain opposition to idealised moral righteousness. Furthermore, her factory experience gave her first-hand insight into the lives of individuals lacking the resilience she had cultivated.
By ‘individuals lacking resilience,’ Weil refers to those without the physical and psychological endurance necessary to withstand harsh conditions. In this context, the physiological and psychological composition of the individual becomes critical in resisting social and economic pressures. For those with limited physical capacities, the risk of succumbing to despair in difficult environments increases substantially, often manifesting in addiction, social deviance, delinquency, or emotional paralysis. Moreover, their rebellions are typically reduced to brief emotional outbursts; without a clear target of opposition, the potential for meaningful change remains blocked.
映画：「渇水」
(Drought -渇水)
This tension is also evident in the increasingly complex nature of contemporary poverty. The film Drought (渇水) portrays the struggles of a municipal water department worker tasked with visiting households and businesses in arrears on their water bills. When payment cannot be collected, he must carry out water shut-offs, cutting off access to water. During a summer heatwave, the residents affected by these shut-offs do not always present sympathetic cases. Some have fallen into despair, losing any sense of priority or financial planning. Others appear selfish, failing to pay their bills due to gambling addictions. In some cases, mothers in arrears prioritise their smartphones over their families’ essential needs.
In this context, the term labourers primarily refers to the water department employees. These workers often bear the brunt of public frustration, facing insults such as, “You’re just working for taxpayer money.” This conflict illustrates the tension between institutional policy and individual responsibility. Water shut-offs are implemented based on public policy, which must be applied uniformly to all users to maintain fairness and sustainability. However, these workers, despite being agents of the system, are human and must enforce these policies while facing resentment from those unable to pay. This dynamic extends to vulnerable groups, including single mothers, some of whom depend on men who leave them financially and emotionally stranded. In such cases, financial survival—not mere pleasure—drives their behaviour. Even under these circumstances, the water department employee may assist by helping families store water before shutting off their supply.
(Social Support and Institutional Constraints)
Support systems within institutions and society must continuously evolve to accommodate the needs of the vulnerable. Conversely, decisions to withdraw support on a personal level become necessary to safeguard mental health and the sustainability of shared resources. As individuals do not possess infinite emotional or material resources, boundaries must sometimes be established to preserve long-term relationships. In practice, however, people rarely have the clarity to assess these considerations when overwhelmed by hardship. This may partly explain why society often seems indifferent to individual tragedies.
Weil’s writings highlight how institutional inadequacies and injustices—such as precarious employment and insufficient social security—constrain individuals and perpetuate cycles of poverty. However, her reflections transcend the conflict between institutions and individuals by focusing on human fragility. Her philosophical inquiries explore what individuals can do and what emotions ought to be nurtured between people. Yet, the boundaries of these inquiries remain ambiguous. Weil’s search for meaning unfolds through the ‘hypothetical truths’ she articulated in her factory diaries. It is here that her concepts of ‘turns’ and ‘contradictions’ demand both lived experience and abstract understanding.
Ⅴ The labourer and Poetry’ (1) Plato, ed.
In the secondary literature surrounding Simone Weil’s renowned work “Poetry for the Labourer,” many interpretations suggest that labourers may find salvation by cultivating sensitivity and mystical richness through engaging with poetry. However, I find that this reading does not align with my understanding of her text.
First and foremost, poetry revolves around ‘intuition,’ a concept that both the author and the reader must grasp. Yet, articulating such a concept within an academic or self-help framework is exceedingly difficult. Intuition resides in a realm that language may only partially express, never fully resolving it. While language is a powerful medium for conveying human experience and emotion, it remains inherently limited.
Spiritual fulfilment and cultural experiences often transcend the boundaries of language, relying on intuitive understanding and sensitivity. This realm encompasses complexities, depth, and contradictory emotions that resist verbal expression, manifesting instead as inner transformations and profound realisations. Weil herself noted that persuading others is challenging when relying solely on impressions without concrete evidence, yet she asserted that human misery could only be expressed through impressions: “Misery is constituted solely of impressions.” Through her writing, she captures the nuanced layers of human experience that extend beyond words.
In early 20th-century France, Taylorism—a system of scientific management developed by Frederick Winslow Taylor in the United States—was widely criticised. Taylorism divided labour into smaller tasks to maximise productivity, clarifying the roles of individual workers. However, the outbreak of World War I forced France to adopt Taylorist principles to facilitate the mass production of munitions. The need for efficiency and large-scale output led to the application of task specialisation and standardisation, improving productivity but rendering the work more monotonous and exhausting. Labourers faced faster-paced tasks with reduced autonomy, and both women and children entered the workforce. After the war, France pursued economic reconstruction and industrialisation, often under difficult conditions. Many factories operated with lax safety standards, subjecting workers to long hours and constant risks of injury. Wages were low, leaving working-class families in crowded, dilapidated housing, barely able to meet their basic needs. In this environment, Weil encountered the dehumanising aspects of factory work and observed the suppression of labourers’ potential.
Despite its limitations, recognising the value of language remains essential for fostering empathy and holistic understanding. Beauty, sensitivity, and intuition play crucial roles in bridging the gaps left by verbal expression. At the age of 16 in 1925, Weil demonstrated an early appreciation for the symbolic nature of wisdom, observing that “Plato’s thought is most beautiful when revealed through myths.” Although she frequently referenced Plato, her interpretations of Books VI and VII of The Republic were uniquely her own.
Weil engages with Plato’s metaphor of the ‘gigantic animal’ (θηρίον μέγα) in Book VI of The Republic, in which the state and society are likened to a vast and ferocious creature. This creature possesses distinct likes and dislikes, controlled by a ‘keeper’ who knows its tendencies well. What the creature favours is deemed “good,” and what it rejects is labelled “evil.” The key insight of this metaphor is that moral judgments are dictated by the preferences of the masses, symbolised by the animal. Plato warned of the dangers posed by societies governed by such relative and arbitrary standards. Weil aligns with this critique, emphasising that social morality is merely the reflection of collective preferences—nothing more than the likes and dislikes of a gigantic animal. She contended that morality, governed by social necessity, is inherently relative and can only be transcended through divine intervention. True goodness, in her view, must be directly revealed by God to the human soul.
Weil extends her engagement with Plato by reinterpreting Book VII of The Republic through the lens of love and ethics. Using the famous allegory of the cave, she argues that “humans must turn towards the good and love beyond themselves,” advocating for ethical growth grounded in a relationship with God rather than in intellectual achievements alone. Her interpretation moves beyond Plato’s educational theories, emphasising the moral and religious dimensions of human development. In Plato’s original text, the allegory of the cave depicts the gradual progression from ignorance to knowledge. While the focus is not on love, Weil reinterprets the allegory as a meditation on the capacity to love and the impossibility of self-love, comparing the eye’s inability to see itself directly with the limits of self-love.
Even in modern times, based on my own experience, when I worked part-time as a newspaper collector in 2013, I had to visit households to collect payments. The area I was assigned to mainly consisted of elderly people living in poverty. As solicitation and collection were handled by different personnel, I often received complaints about discrepancies between what had been promised and what was delivered. When payments could not be collected, I had to visit the same households two or three times. In practice, several elderly individuals were locked into auto-renewed newspaper subscriptions, unable to read what they purchased or withdraw cash due to physical infirmities. In some instances, I found elderly women wearing adult nappies, unable to dress themselves, calling out for help. Despite their circumstances, collectors could only leave notifications of unsuccessful payment attempts. Rooms were often filled with neglect and strong odours, a testament to the overwhelming difficulties these individuals faced.
Collectors lacked the authority to cancel contracts, even when it was clear that the other party could not fulfil their obligations. Without an explicit request to cancel, I had no power to advise them otherwise. These experiences revealed the limitations of personal enlightenment and sensitivity in addressing poverty and incapacity.
Collection work, while straightforward, does not cultivate transferable skills or essential competencies. It is a task that even children could perform, offering those without experience or qualifications an opportunity to earn a modest income. However, it requires patience and a significant degree of inner resolve. In stark contrast, proficiency in my primary occupation, details of which I will withhold, directly correlates with skill development through the completion of tasks. Skills gained from collection work, however, rarely translate into other career opportunities.
It is important to acknowledge that the situations I witnessed in these homes could one day become my own reality. Life viewed through a strictly materialistic lens suggests that a severe brain injury could render me incapable of sustaining my current lifestyle. If existence is reduced to mere materiality, the erosion of human dignity becomes an ever-present risk.
It may be argued that Simone Weil’s exploration of love and God was profoundly influenced by Platonic thought, particularly by reflections on the absurdity of Socrates’ execution, which deeply affected Plato himself. Articulating such abstract concepts is no small feat, requiring the translation of intuitive insights into verbal expression. Yet, for Simone Weil, this task was indispensable.
Following the Platonic tradition, Weil believed that liberation from the tyranny of society’s ‘great beast’ could only be achieved by transcending egocentric perspectives and locating one’s value in a relationship with God. For Weil, the inherent human capacity for love manifests in turning one’s attention beyond the material world, discovering true goodness through divine connection. This pursuit, for her, embodied the Platonic “Idea.” Plato’s exploration of ideal societies and true beauty rested on the notion that material existence is transient, with real value residing in the intangible. This resonates with Weil’s yearning for spiritual depth, symbolised by her emphasis on “poetry.”
Continued in ‘Labour and Poetry (2): The Christ Edition.
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.
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).
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.
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。
Joseph Ratzinger, who served as Pope Benedict XVI, passed away on December 31, 2022. Before his death, he published “Jesus of Nazareth,” another significant work. One of the three volumes was released during his papacy, and his commentary will be used to explore the meanings of prayers and how they relate to Leibniz’s concepts of harmonies and monads.
Common denominator.
Leibniz sought harmony amid the conflict between Catholicism and Protestantism.
Benedict XVI aimed to achieve harmony amidst the ongoing conflicts of religion and the ever-evolving nature of society.
Monadology: by Leibniz.
The Monadology, written by Leibniz, consists of 90 chapters but is considered a fragment. The term “monad” is derived from the Greek word “monas” meaning single or one. Living in a time of conflicts between Catholics and Protestants, Leibniz sought to find ultimate harmony in the concept of the unique and singular “One.” A mathematical-geometric point is distinct in its own right, representing an abstract conceptual position rather than an existential one. However, an existential position must encompass the ‘many’ within the ‘one.’ Just like a flock of sheep, individual monads are central to the whole. The center of a circle may be a singular point, yet it contains an infinite number of diameters. The spirit itself exists as a singular entity, yet it embodies an infinity of past, present, and future manifestations. While the spirit may not existentially manifest, it serves to represent and express the multiplicity of existence. The key concepts in Leibniz’s Monadology are “representation” and “expression.”
If the Lord’s Prayer, which I recite daily, allows for both Obedience and Desire, when will my words become sacred? No one can decide that. Prayer has the skyline of the human heart. That is the analogue of human beings, and that is why Descartes’ cogito ergosum is not enough, and there is always me who is not aware of it. The words I chant are more complete than my awareness. That is the language of prayer. The unaware I, the ” small I”, is Leibnizian in its monadic nature. A typical Catholic language of prayer is described as.
Our Father, who art in heaven hallowed be thy name; thy kingdom come; thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread and forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us; and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. Amen.
Prayer is not only directed to God, but also questions the depths of the self. Naturally, we find ourselves constantly questioning who it is that we are praying to, the ‘I’. Many commentaries on prayer say, “Do not pray so that you can be seen in public” (Matthew 6), but for the Japanese, who have a strong sense of syncretism, it is more important to look at the self. Even though there are many desires and selfishness, it is difficult to look at one’s own identity. What the prayer confirms is ‘we’, the community. The Japanese are awakening to what they are as part of that, and to the fact that I, as part of the community, am the only one in the world.
Prayer that is merely sympathetic to a poorly thought-out community is more common today. Leibniz’s famous ‘Monad’ was difficult to serve as an example because it was less familiar than Descartes and modern philosophy. Nevertheless, I decided to write a commentary on the Lord’s Prayer, which he wrote before Benedict XVI (Joseph Ratzinger) returned from serious illness, because it was moving and reminded me of the Monad. Leibniz lived at a time when Catholics and Protestants were in conflict, but Leibniz was a man who thought of a philosophy that would bring harmony, as if preserving an unsolvable mystery.
For a person of belief, God is absolute, and self-consciousness is easily a Cartesian starting point for self-consciousness, whereas for a non-believer, it begins with convictions. Faith is spiritual and does not require a basis. However, it does not mean living a meaningless life. Beliefs and the faith of others do not have a window and do not intersect. But it is flexible, like the soul.
Leibniz discovered microorganisms under the microscope that were invisible to the naked eye, revealing the presence of life in animals and plants, as well as a universe yet unknown. Descartes emphasized the significance of ‘thinking’ as a fundamental aspect of consciousness, whereas in Leibniz’s philosophy, ‘expression’ and ‘representation’ are considered essential actions. Catholic prayer, by nature, focuses on conscious, human-centered prayer. However, the concept that phenomena are not merely ‘appearances’ (Schein) and that the action of the spirit is not an entity, but rather a ‘subject’, serves as a foundational principle in German idealism. Prayer’s essence lies not in mere appearance but in expression, encapsulating a singular point representing the infinity of myriad dimensions that lead back to God at the center. (This perspective contrasts with the conventional image of God and man as perpendicular to heaven and earth; rather, it is likened to a circle with God at the core.)
ⅠOur Father,who art in heaven
――This discretion, which is of the very essence of prayer, does not exclude prayer in common. The Our Father is itself a prayer uttered in the first person plural, and it is only by becoming part of the “we” of God’s children that we can reach up to him beyond the limits of this world in the first place. And yet this “we” awakens the inmost core of the person; in the act of prayer the totally personal and the communal must always pervade each other, as we will see more closely in our exposition of the Our Father. Benedict XVI, Pope . Jesus of Nazareth (p.129). The Crown Publishing Group. Kindle 版.――
How strongly can we be aware of the word Father, we cannot basically see him with the naked eye. In theology, the Lord Father is the root of all good things and the measure of a righteous (perfect) man. ‘But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. ” (Matthew 5.44 and following)
This love that loves “to the extreme” (John 13) is fulfilled in the Lord’s prayer for his enemies on the cross, and shows the essence of the Father. The Father is this love. Jesus fulfilled this love, making him fully ‘the Son’. The original of this prayer is part of the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 6. (Luke: 6)
It is a comprehensive statement of the right human way of being. Nevertheless, John Paul II wrote something interesting on this question of why God is not manifested before us.
From one point of view it is right to say that God revealed too much of Himself to man, too much of that which is most divine, that which is His intimate life; He revealed Himself in His Mystery. He was not mindful of the fact that such an unveiling would in a certain way obscure Him in the eyes of man, because man is not capable of withstanding an excess of the Mystery. Paul II, Pope John. Crossing the Threshold of Hope (p.37). Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group. Kindle 版.
‟Reasons certainly do exist to believe in Him; but—as many have maintained and still maintain—there are also reasons to doubt, or even deny, His existence” So, John Paul II is also quoted here in Descartes’ ‘I think, therefore I am’.‟ It states that this sprouted from the philosophy of rationalism on a different soil from Thomas Aquinas and St Thomas.” No different from St Thomas who said “for whom it is not thought which determines existence, but existence, “esse” which determines thought”.Jesus was executed because he publicly declared that he was the Son of God. That was fair in terms of the legislation at the time. John Paul II did not hide the fact that getting too close to the mystery brings tragedy to human beings, one aspect of which he did not hide.
There is deduction and induction, but Leibniz tried to develop from simple truths by deduction. In principle, ‘Our Father’ is absolute, so there is no hypothesis. Therefore, the basis of theology is deduction. Leibniz’s rationalism developed by deduction was opposed, among other things, to empiricism. If it were derived from experience, religious rituals would not proceed, since it is a philosophy about God, from which it was not removed. He took the further position that certain perceptions were innate and derived from evidential principles.
The novel Sophie’s World tells an interesting story. A non-religious astronaut bragged that he had seen space many times but there was no God. A Christian doctor said. I have had many brain operations but no ‘thoughts’. Sophie replies. ‘But the soul cannot even be divided into two.
Thoughts are quite different from things that can be chopped up into smaller pieces, and delusions cannot be surgically removed. Leibniz said that the difference between what is made of matter and everything that emanates from the spirit is that material things can be divided into smaller parts to any extent. The soul, however, cannot be cut into there are two sides of God’s Fatherhood. The Gospels confirm that God being Father has two aspects. God is our Creator and our Father. Since he created us, we belong to God. As existence itself, it is the essence of the biblical picture of man that God created each and every human being. But what does it mean to accept this? If we try to convince ourselves of this only through ontology and empiricism, we can only create a polarisation of believing and not believing. Naturally, many people today will not believe.
＞Thinking as a monad.
Humans are made up of a heart and a brain, but simply piecing them together does not create an ‘I’. So too is God, and God is not made by combining only the languages described by the various Bibles. It is fair to say that this is where the difficulty of proselytising lies. It is that causality alone is difficult for them to understand and even to exist. The empiricist Hume did not believe in the existence of angels, so he told them to burn their theology books. Leibniz was adamant about that one point, ‘God’, which cannot be spoken of by experience alone.
Monads always exist separately, independently and without windows. No matter how often a prayer is explained, there is no fixed point where the goal is. This is because it inevitably requires experience. Explanations are merely to help with feelings, but the language of prayer always exists apart from experience. Its culmination is ‘Our Father’.
While it is possible to consider prayer only in its literal meaning, some people try to understand the details of the word by tracing it back to its etymology. They assume that all the time spent praying is worthwhile, even though their understanding is incomplete. The language of prayer emphasises what kind of people we should be and that we should be irreverent with ‘us’ rather than a heightened ‘ego’.
There is a part of us that is me. The I is inherent in us.
（I do not subscribe to any teaching that causes the loss of the ‘I’. I dislike and strongly reject such religious people）
Monadology is predicate-dominant, with the subject containing the predicate. It is the predicate that is important to God, for example, ‘God is love’. God is not prominently illuminated only by being God. We should not follow for that reason alone. We must focus on the predicate of what God is. The words of the prayer do not relegate God the Father to a star somewhere far away, but that He comes from the One Father, who is the measure and source of the Father. That God is the Father has a greater reality than all earthly fathers have.
we are testifying to the fact that, while we have different earthly fathers, we all come from one single Father,……
God’s fatherhood is more real than human fatherhood, because he is the ultimate source of our being; because he has thought and willed us from all eternity; because he gives us our true paternal home, which is eternal. And if earthly fatherhood divides, heavenly fatherhood unites. Heaven, then, means that other divine summit from which we all come and to which we are all meant to return.
Benedict XVI, Pope . Jesus of Nazareth (pp.141-142). The Crown Publishing Group. Kindle 版.
-In order to distinguish between the action of God and the action of the creature, it is necessary to clarify what the concept of an individual entity (1) is (Metaphysical Narrative, 8) Description of predicate superiority
The changeable state which grasps and represents a multiplicity in one or the other is nothing other than what is called sensation or perception, which is to be distinguished from apperception or consciousness, as will be seen in what follows.(Monadologie v14)
And the action or activity of the inner principle that causes the change or progress from one perception to another can be called desire.(Monadologie v15)
And one creature is more perfect than another / in so far as one perceives in it / something from which one can deduce a priori the reason for what occurs in another thing; and by this one says / that it grows into another creature.（Monadologie v51）
Ⅱ hallowed be thy name
God named his existence in Exodus 3:14, “I am the one who says, ‘I am'”. There were many gods in the time of Moses in the Ten Commandments, “Thou shalt not defile the name of God”. Therefore, Moses asked God for his name in order to demonstrate God’s special authority over those gods. In the world’s view of ‘polytheism’, God has a name. God must answer as long as he is asked. The god who spoke to Moses also had to have a name.
God could not enter the world of the gods with a name as one of them. God’s answer, “I am the one who says, ‘I am’,” expresses both agreement and rejection of Moses’ question. It is therefore correct that the name of God as presented in JHWH should not be pronounced in Israel. God’s name must not be downgraded to polytheism. That leaves the question of what God’s judgement is the Name. Names enable us to call out, but do not indicate our true nature. Adam in Genesis gave the animals names in order to call them. God also made it possible for humans to be called, and then accepted to be hurt. This makes it clear what is meant by the words of the prayer, “HALLOWED BE THY NAME”
We can cling to God in our daily lives some days and forget others. Including such lowered routines, we pray that God will be raised up with ‘HALLOWED BE THY NAME’. God’s answer to the name deserves, in monadology, to be ‘revealed’. The hidden presence of God has been revealed. It must not be a temporary representation. The name of God is not decomposed, (Monadology, v. 4) and the one who prays is doomed to neither generation nor end by God, but to perish by extinction. (ibid., v. 6) The praying side exists with a nature. Each nature must be different. (Ibid., v. 6) Each nature must be different from the other, for what happens in the composite always comes from a single element. But the praying side cannot distinguish between souls. In the single ‘God’. (ibid., v. 8) the principle of sufficient reason, why A is A and not other than A, is sufficiently fulfilled. It also follows that no proposition is just. (ibid., v. 32) While it is done only by the principle of memory, it is the same as the beast (ibid., v. 28) Today, even if it is a day of unenlightenment, experiencing and remembering are not the only means. When we pray on this day, we are praying to “God”, “the Father, the Lord”, whose presence demands the elevation of human holiness.
his plea, of course, is always an occasion for us to examine our consciences seriously. How do I treat God’s holy name?……Do I stand in reverence before the mystery of the burning bush, before his incomprehensible closeness, even to the point of his presence in the Eucharist, where he truly gives himself entirely into our hands? Do I take care that God’s holy companionship with us will draw us up into his purity and sanctity, instead of dragging him down into the filth? Benedict XVI, Pope . Jesus of Nazareth (pp.144-145). The Crown Publishing Group. Kindle 版.
Ⅲ Thy kingdom come
This passage is often misunderstood even by clergy, but even Benedict XVI did not say here that wishing for God’s kingdom will promise a paradise. If anyone, even believers, speaks of religion making them happy, they are not studying hard enough. The life of faith is not a simple matter of abandoning something and automatically moving up in status. The Kingdom of God is the rule of God, which means that God’s will is the standard for everything.
This divine will makes justice, and divine justice should be the measure of human justice. ‘But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well.” (Matthew 6:33) These words give order of priority to all human conduct, to our behaviour in everyday life. Then everything else will be given to you” (Matthew 6:33) These words give order of priority to all human conduct, to our behaviour in everyday life. In the Old Testament, there is this story. The Lord appeared to the young king in a dream and told him to wish for whatever he liked, because he would listen to any wish. Solomon told the people to be able to judge between good and evil. God commended Solomon because he did not choose ego, but asked for what was essential. ‘May the kingdom come’ is ruled by the Lord, but to have a listening and discerning heart, that is the essential desire. He prays for the dispersed and separated humanity to judge good and evil, so that in time it will become one.
The soul is given the function by memory to seek connections between memories. This function is similar to, but distinct from, reason. It can be compared to an animal: a dog that has been hit with a stick will run away the next time (Monadology, xxvi), but humans contain contradictions and do not choose solely on the basis of causality. Humans take even God’s treatment as a trial. Like Job and Jeremiah. Even if the scene in front of them is peaceful, there is war and misery in the land of the invisible. Or perhaps he is unhappy himself. It is important to be fulfilled like the kingdom of heaven and to vow to pass justice for it. Do not pray while you sleep that when you wake up the world will have been a heavenly kingdom. To choose righteousness every day. That is what we chant. This conformity with the only one, the hope for conformity because it cannot be fulfilled, the impulse behind the rational language, the power to seek the mystery is contained in its contradiction, but I think it is pure (cf. Ibid., pp. 49-62).
The encounter with Christ makes this petition even deeper and more concrete……
By the same token, the request for a listening heart becomes a request for communion with Jesus Christ, the petition that we increasingly become “one” with him (Gal 3:28). What is requested in this petition is the true following of Christ, which becomes communion with him and makes us one body with him.
Benedict XVI, Pope . Jesus of Nazareth (pp.146-147). The Crown Publishing Group. Kindle 版.
Ⅵ The will be done on earth as it is in Heaven
Two things are immediately clear from the words of this petition: God has a will with and for us and it must become the measure of our willing and being; and the essence of “heaven” is that it is where God’s will is unswervingly done.
Benedict XVI, Pope . Jesus of Nazareth (p.147). The Crown Publishing Group. Kindle 版.
Numerous holy books assume that man knows the will of God in his heart, that the knowledge of God, called conscience, is deeply rooted in the heart. In Matthew 26:36-46, Jesus came to Gethsemane with his disciples and said, ‘Sit here while I go over there and pray’. He was accompanied by Peter’s and the two sons of Zebedee, who were sorrowful at that time. Jesus prayed thus, saying. ‘Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from me. But not according to my wish, but according to your will” In this case, the cup is the cross, and Jesus was grieved that he would be killed by this wrong judgement. Therefore, he asked God’s will, not my wish. But God did not answer as Solomon did. This ‘not according to my wish but according to His will’ is taken up by Thomas Aquinas. Jesus then turns to a story about a traitor trying to kill him, and that is how we learn the will of God with Jesus. And it is hoped that this means that even our self-love is defeated.
Aristotle held that the perfect reality is entelecheia. Leibniz states that entelecheia always has an order. (Monadology, v. 63) In simple terms, it is a plant. The plant repeats itself according to the same laws and with the same number of petals. Leibniz’s monadology deals mainly with God’s creation in verses 62 to 66. And with regard to the subsequent verses 67 to 80, it refers to what cannot be explained by order as preestablished harmony. Although this is objectionable, a preestablished harmony is a law that can’t be unravelled. No matter how abstractly and infinitely one speaks of philosophy and theology, even if prime factors are given and finer numbers are given, as in prime factorisation, they do not exceed the original natural number. For example, if we do a prime factorisation of the natural number 60, we get 2 x 2 x 3 x 5 = 60. (Only 13 is a prime factor, so the prime factorisation is 13.) However, God can be likened to the prime number ‘1’ and the natural numbers that are bracketed as prime factors are us, but as long as God is the solution, it is a mystery until we experience the solution. Prime factors are only one expression. And even if the vague view is a scheduled harmony, it is not causal or easy to understand. What God has prepared will never exceed the size of creation, no matter how much it is dismantled and divided by man. Yet the magnitude is unimaginable. To live in this world is The only clues to the mystery left by Jesus were ‘love’ and ‘justice’. It must bring the wounded closer to the ability to notice them, to reach out to them and to help them. Otherwise the kingdom of God will not come.
The gravitational pull of our own will constantly draws us away from God’s will and turns us into mere “earth.” But he accepts us, he draws us up to himself, into himself, and in communion with him we too learn God’s will.
Benedict XVI, Pope . Jesus of Nazareth (p.150). The Crown Publishing Group. Kindle 版.
Ⅴ Give us this day our daily bread and forgive us
This passage is the most ‘human’ petition in the Lord’s Prayer. To the disciples, the Lord says, “Before I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink; or about your body, what you will wear” (Matt. 6:25), and the mission of the people is to food The mission of the people was to pray about their worries about food. Bread is the bounty of the earth, the fruit of labour. This is opposed to the arrogance of the people, who say that they realise the fertility by their own strength alone. Give us daily bread”, the Greek word for ‘daily’ is EPIOUSIOS, which can be translated in two ways. One is ‘the bread we barely need to live’ and the other is ‘the bread of the future’.
It also signifies the bread of the eschatological end. Bread is purely edible. It is difficult to realise for rice staples, but the staple food is necessary for the survival of life, and it is important in daily life that this is available. That bread, that thing, is to be the Logos. From there it becomes religious.
‘Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God” (Matthew 4:4) The bread increased by miracles reminds us of the miracle and shows that the original food of man is the Logos, the eternal Word of God. The eternal Logos becomes the bread of reality for man. It corresponds to the food presented to the Israelites by Moses as a gift of God. What would happen if we were to speak of it as a philosophy? The bread that the poor wish for is a mystery that wishes for the necessities of the day, so resolution is not require.
If we dare to speak of the lack of the rule of reason, bearing in mind that this is the first condition, we begin with an account of ‘Buridan’s donkey’ (Buridan’s ass). Buridan the donkey has found a bundle of straw, his favourite food. However, Buridan also noticed another bundle of straw that he could see looking back. The donkey was clever enough to wonder which one he was going to eat. So Buridan couldn’t decide and starved to death. This is similar to the foolish consequence of starving to death because one is wise and rational, and to the fact that one should not look for a philosophical basis, doxa, in the bread of communion. This Buridan is said to be a French philosopher, but the actual source is unknown. Leibniz, however, gives it in a parable in his theodicy.
The donkey that starved to death is foolish, but because of its foolishness, a principle emerges. When food and sacredness coincide, it means that everything loses its meaning if it is not simply accepted as daily sustenance.
Every time we pray daily, “GIVE US THIS DAY OUR DAILY BREAD”, both the “I” who understands the meaning and the “I” who does not try to understand are uniqueness, but the relationship with God to the spirit is not simply that of inventor and machine, but like that of father and son. (Monadology, v. 84) Communion is contradicted as superstition for those without faith and absoluteness for those with faith. Tabula rasa (blank slate) exists in contradiction to eternal truth. However, feeding the poor would be in agreement with both. It is important to pray that the sustenance for the poor and our own sustenance will continue into the future, to our children and to the poor, so that holiness and life will not cease without separation.
He says: We who are privileged to receive the Eucharist as our bread must nevertheless always pray that none of us be permanently cut off and severed from the body of Christ.
Benedict XVI, Pope . Jesus of Nazareth (pp.156-157). The Crown Publishing Group. Kindle 版.
Ⅵ our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us
Leibniz’s ‘theodicy’ addressed the differences between Protestants and Catholics. For example, he wrote not only about the conflict between Protestants and Catholics, but also about the conflict between Protestants with regard to the above-mentioned ‘bread’. In Japan, Luther is the most famous Protestant, but Friedrich Zwingli (Zwingli), who also opposed Luther, did not accept sacramentalism. He regarded the participation of Jesus Christ in the Lord’s Supper as a mere figurative expression, and in doing so made use of the philosophical principle that the body can only exist in one place at all times. Luther, on the other hand, is more faithful to the literal sense of the Bible, making it real, including supernatural mysteries. In their opinion, they rejected the doctrine of Transsubstantiation (Total Transubstantiation – the transformation of the bread and wine of the sacrament (Seisan) into the flesh and blood of Christ) rather than that arising from the biblical expression and rejected Konsubstantiatio ( consubstantiatio – Christ coexists with the bread and wine) dogma and the bread, and held these things ignorant.
Although it did not require a union of the two, they were not merely logical, but also important in fulfilling Christ’s final wish. Through faith justification, they chose to maintain the everlasting presence of the Messiah’s body. In modern times, the conflict between Catholics and Protestants goes without saying, but even in Catholicism, the desire to hear the Lord’s petition remains the same. The fifth petition of the Lord’s Prayer presupposes a world of indebtedness, i.e. sin. The theme of forgiveness runs through all the Gospels, with the story of the ‘retainer who would not forgive his fellow man’ in Matthew 18. The man, a high-ranking deputy, had begged the king to forgive him a high debt, but shortly afterwards he blackmailed his fellow strangers into forgiving him a small differential debt. His swearing came to the ears of the king, who forgave him from other retainers, and he had his remission revoked. The king is a parable of the divine father, but the story does not end there.
――In chapter 23 of Luke’s Gospel, two other sinners were to be executed besides Jesus at his crucifixion.
One of the sinners cursed Jesus right up to his death, saying, “If you are the Messiah, prove it by saving yourself”. The other sinner, on the other hand, defended Jesus. Despite being in the same situation, he humbly said to Jesus, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom”. Jesus said to such a sinner. ‘“Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise’.
The sinner was loved by Jesus just before his execution. Regarding Leibniz’s principle of indistinguishable = identical, Jesus and the sinner are separate entities, even though they are at the same place of execution. Separate and uncrossing clocks of destiny exist for each, but they are bonded by ‘forgiveness’. Christians say that Jesus came down to earth, the cross, whereas crucifixion is raised high for the sinner to be exposed. We know that two people with different vectors can be bonded ‘on the spot’. Unlike the cursed sinner, it is through ‘forgiveness’ that the bond is achieved. ‘Forgiveness’ is, I believe, the beautiful point of contact between Leibnizian philosophy and Catholic theology. The sinner’s turn towards good is an invisible generative change. The prayer, ‘Forgiving Evil’, is the constant wish for a change to goodness over today’s evil intentions. It contains the ‘we’, the I.
Self-awareness does not come from collectivity. The collective enjoyed executions in a state of spectatorship. Community is not a dysfunctional situation where love and justice are in sync. The ‘justice’ awakened by the sinner just before death is love for Jesus. I hope for a world in which it is pervasive, and I use it as a prayer to inspire me.
If we want to understand the petition fully and make it our own, we must go one step further and ask: What is forgiveness, really? What happens when forgiveness takes place? Guilt is a reality,……For this reason, forgiveness must be more than a matter of ignoring, of merely trying to forget. Guilt must be worked through, healed, and thus overcome. Forgiveness exacts a price—first of all from the person who forgives. Benedict XVI, Pope . Jesus of Nazareth (p.158). The Crown Publishing Group. Kindle 版.
Ⅶ and lead us not into temptation
If we are to use the language of Leibniz’s ‘theodicy’, philosophy has ensured that the meaning of words needs to be developed so that mysteries do not become empty words. Throughout the long history of the world, as long as there are words, they are disproved by inference. Once we are tempted by the theory of probability to pray correctly and find that phenomena are connected to each other, we are driven by the assumption that they are always connected. ‘Temptation’ is a stumbling block for people, including human immorality, but who is the one who tempts and leads? Temptation is certainly the devil, but there is also an interesting passage in Jeremiah 20:7.
Jeremiah20：７ Du hast mich verführt, Herr, und ich habe mich verführen lassen; du hast mich gepackt und mir Gewalt angetan. Nun spotten sie immerzu über mich, alle lachen mich aus. Denn sooft ich in deinem Auftrag rede, muss ich Unrecht anprangern. »Verbrechen!«, muss ich rufen, »Unterdrückung!« Und das bringt mir nichts als Spott und Hohn ein, Tag für Tag.
‘Lord, you have enticed me’, which was repeatedly called out in the film Die grosse Stille (The Great Silence), giving rise to questions. In Japanese it is translated in different words, but in the German version of the country of production it is verführt （enticed） The young Jeremiah was made a prophet by the Lord. But because he was righteous, he was estranged from the people. This is more evident in the German version, Tag für Tag and it is repeated ‘day in and day out’, but the constant cries of injustice, ridicule and scorn disgusted him.
It is easier to live when you do what the masses tell you to do. That is why he lamented what God gave him as ‘temptation’. Benedict XVI used the analogy with Job, but this time I have brought out Jeremiah. It is Christian to say that temptation is the devil, but in reality the devil is more incomprehensible than God.
There is scripture in the deeds of God. Even from a philosophical perspective, despite the contradiction between eternal truth and the psychology of chance, God has a fixed point, but existence with regard to Satan does not exist as eternal truth, only as chance. Simone Weil’s ‘Creation. Good is shattered and scattered to evil” would be exactly that. It means that God’s deeds had an original form and were shattered, but the Satan’s are not. The Bible reading allows people to recognise God as common, but as for Satan, it is a coincidence of each. Light does not solve everything. Because, as in John 1, darkness avoids light without understanding it. Jeremiah was chosen by God, but he shouted because he could no longer bear the malice of the people.
In the New Testament, 1 Corinthians chapter 10 says that God doesn’t give us trials we can’t endure. This is a well-known passage even in the non-religious world, but there is a continuation to this, but we are rarely told the rest of the story. Therefore, it is misunderstood as a ‘never-give-up spirit’.
It is a continuation of this: ‘It provides a way out in times of temptation and enables us to withstand temptation’.
Regarding this item, although Benedict XVI was an excellent commentary on the story of Benedict XVI, I judge that it does not extend to practice if I am honest, including the Catholic clergy issue. Therefore, I will end by adding Simone Weil, which I have adopted in my own way. ‘To love the truth means to hold on to the vacuum and consequently to accept death. It is not difficult to imagine such idealism, although it is unclear whether there is such a thing as immunity to temptation. How can we avoid being misguided by collectivity, like a school of fish, including the mistakes of one individual?
Temptation – from what do we protect ourselves, this is a ‘mystery’ but not a ‘mystery’ to leave behind. Loving the truth, by which the soul is likely to turn to good, but still one sins. Truth is not to be kept alive simply by explaining it. If the path leading to truth is cut off, it is tantamount to death. Philosophical rationality that does not leave mysteries unexplained, that looks to mysteries that cannot be solved, this section is not particularly altruistic, rather it is self-reliant. It is an exhortation to the mind of the self, not to the outside world. ‘Awareness’ is a prayer that must not be turned away from, as in the Leibnizian philosophy, which has made it a ‘reflection’ on oneself.
we pray, “And lead us not into temptation,” we are expressing our awareness “that the enemy can do nothing against us unless God has allowed it beforehand, so that our fear, our devotion and our worship may be directed to God—（ｐ163）
When we pray the sixth petition of the Our Father, we must therefore, on one hand, be ready to take upon ourselves the burden of trials that is meted out to us. On the other hand, the object of the petition is to ask God not to mete out more than we can bear, not to let us slip from his hands. We make this prayer in the trustful certainty that Saint Paul has articulated for us: “God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your strength, but with the temptation will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it” (1 Cor 10:13).
Benedict XVI, Pope . Jesus of Nazareth (p.163.164). The Crown Publishing Group. Kindle 版.
Ⅷ but deliver us from evil.
The last petition of the Our Father takes up the previous one again and gives it a positive twist.
Benedict XVI, Pope . Jesus of Nazareth (p.164). The Crown Publishing Group. Kindle 版.
Many people may not even understand Leibniz’s monadology in terms of the soul having no windows. The explanation of monadology itself is straightforward but difficult to understand. It is much like the language of prayer. If you read theodicy, you will be exposed to Leibniz’s view of religion and the meaning of the monad will be more profound, but the monadology is disconnected. ‘theodicy’ and other books are only what he calls experience, accidental truths, but he wanted monadology to be an adjunct to eternal truths. I think it was to adapt it to any age, as it applies to today.
The words of the Lord’s Prayer are simple and can be taken verbatim. It contains the basis of modern morality. As for theology, it seems to be decided what evil is meant here. It seems to mean political evil, scepticism and save us from the evil that ensnares Christians. However, it makes sense to me that the words of the prayer itself do not specify the ‘forces of evil’ or the ‘evil one’. In Greek philosophy, faith was equated with doxa (speculation), which was lower than knowledge. Ancient Greek sexual life was unique, and love between men was considered to be the real thing. Women were only child bearers, and even if a woman had both knowledge and beauty, her status was not superior to that of a man. My writing in this way was, in ancient times, ‘evil’. Evil is subject to current trends.
In reality evil is not always as symbolic as the dragon of the Apocalypse. It is important to rationalise for once that Jesus Christ was not falsely executed. That was the law back then, not false accusations. Plants are determined to repeat themselves with regularity in the number of petals and leaves, but no two flowers are the same. The law also has existed since ancient times that one must not commit murder, but it is not exactly the same as it was in ancient times. The words of the prayer also return to the third time with these words: ‘THY KINGDOM COME’. But this is not a simple repetition. We cannot know the words in the Bible or the truths we have learned, even if we scrape them together. But as we learn more and more, we come to know Jeremiah and many other sufferings and absurdities. We must pray that our desire is not more superficial.
Last: Division does not keep simple love alive.
This time, during Benedict XVI’s critical condition, he bought the remaining copy of a three-volume book called Jesus of Nazareth, which contained a commentary on the Lord’s Prayer. While I was reading it, he died on 31 December 2022. My only impression was this. ‘The Bible says that God calls each of us by a name that no one else knows’ (Revelation 2:17), he was quoted as saying, and just as I was reading that passage I came across the news of his death. I started out only wanting to write down my one word impression, “Did God call him a name that a man as wise as he was did not know? :This is the monad that is impossible to know by memory. I only knew him in books, but I liked books. Maybe that is only part of what makes him up, but I am grateful that he left us books. I loved his books. He wrote seven petitions from the Gospel of Matthew. Three are prayers that call out to ‘you’, four are wishes for ‘us’ and the remaining four are wishes about hope, desire and need.
Having used monadology for simple romance was a consideration due to the unresolved Catholic scandals. Therefore, I could not write the mystery as simply wonderful. There is no fear of criticism from those around me now. Indeed, holiness is truth. However, experience inhibits words of truth when they are ‘hypocritical’. Words distorted by it stink. Just as Benedict XVI himself built a new theology for the harmony of the world’s divisions, so did Leibniz, who saw the corruption and strife in the clergy. What he should have simply looked at God alone, he tried to look at man. What to do with ugly human beings, what to do with precious human beings, what to do with the enigmatic ‘monad’ that neither enhances nor diminishes their value. That act and my current state of mind overlap.
Love simply cannot live in a divided world. It is as easy as possible to say that even injustice is love. Love must live in contradiction with justice. Contradictions, when tamed, are a cradle of stability. Don’t be the kind of person who can sleep peacefully, turning away from those who are suffering in front of you, Leibniz said. ‘We are left with micronised considerations, all the way down to ‘desires’ that we are not even consciously conscious about. ‘Deliver us from evil, that we may always be aware, and that someone in need may be saved.’ Rest to those who are suffering, and may the day when we are released from our burdens, the day when we are called by a name that only God knows, not be a day of sorrow. On that day, may we keep awake to the fact that it is a joyous day.
Amen.
Reference
G.W Leibniz
Monadologie Racle, -German.
Discours de métaphysique.
Versuche in der Theodicée über die Güte Gottes, die Freiheit des Menschen und den Ursprung des Übels: Philosophische Werke Band 4 (Philosophische Bibliothek 499) (German Edition)
Was das Begreifen anlangt, so pflichte ich ihm hierin bei, habe aber schon gezeigt, daß die Mysterien eine Entwicklung des Wortsinnes erheischen, um nicht sine mente soni, leere Worte zu sein: und ich habe auch gezeigt, wie notwendig es ist, auf Einwürfe antworten zu können, da andernfalls die These verworfen werden müßte. Er zitiert theologische
. Er zitiert theologische Autoritäten, welche die Unauflöslichkeit der gegen die Mysterien gerichteten Einwände anzuerkennen scheinen. Einer der ersten ist Luther. Ich habe schon im S 12
sowenig wie die Träume. Wir täuschen uns selbst durch den Gebrauch, den wir davon machen, d. h. durch unsere Folgerungen. Wir lassen uns eben durch Wahrscheinlichkeitsargumente verführen und dadurch werden wir zu der Annahme getrieben, so wie wir die Phänomene oft miteinander verbunden gefunden haben, so müßten sie immer verbunden sein. Da nun alles, was keine Ecken zu haben scheint, für gewöhnlich auch wirklich keine hat, glauben wir leicht, es müßte sich immer so verhalten. Ein solcher Irrtum ist verzeihlich und zuweilen unvermeidlich, wenn wir rasch handeln und das Wahrscheinlichste wählen müssen; haben wir aber Muße und Zeit zur Sammlung, so begehen wir einen Fehler, wenn wir das als sicher hinstellen, was dies gar nicht ist. Die sinnliche Erscheinung befindet sich also oft mit der Wahrheit im Widerspruch, aber unser Urteilsvermögen niemals, wenn es genau den Denkgesetzen gemäß gebraucht wird. Versteht man unter Vernunft ganz allgemein die Fähigkeit, schlecht und recht zu räsonieren, dann gebe ich zu, sie vermag uns zu täuschen und täuscht uns auch wirklich, und zwar sind die Erscheinungen unseres Verstandes ebenso oft täuschend wie die der Sinne: aber es handelt sich hier um die Verkettung der Wahrheiten und um Einwürfe in schulgerechter Form, und in diesem Sinne kann uns die Vernunft unmöglich täuschen.
Dort spendet Gott Gnade und Erbarmen den Unwürdigen; hier spendet er Zorn und Strenge denen, die sie nicht verdient haben; an beiden Stellen zu heftig und unbillig mit Bezug auf die Menschen, aber gerecht und wahrhaft mit Bezug auf sich selbst.
Denn wie das gerecht sein soll, daß er Unwürdige krönt, ist jetzt zwar unbegreiflich, aber wir werden es erkennen, wenn wir dorthin kommen, wo man nicht mehr glauben, sondern das Offenbarte mit eignen Augen schauen wird. Wie es daher gerecht sein soll, daß er die verdammt, welche es nicht verdienen, muß solange geglaubt werden, bis es der Menschensohn uns offenbaren wird.
エレミヤ書20：７（ドイツ語）Du hast mich verführt, Herr, und ich habe mich verführen lassen; du hast mich gepackt und mir Gewalt angetan. Nun spotten sie immerzu über mich, alle lachen mich aus. Denn sooft ich in deinem Auftrag rede, muss ich Unrecht anprangern. »Verbrechen!«, muss ich rufen, »Unterdrückung!« Und das bringt mir nichts als Spott und Hohn ein, Tag für Tag.
「主よ、あなたが私を誘惑した」というところだが、これは映画「大いなる沈黙」（Die grosse Stille）で何度も連呼され疑問を招いた箇所である。日本語では別の言葉で翻訳されているが、制作国のドイツ語版ではverführtと誘惑となっている。若きエレミアは主から預言者とされた。しかし、彼は正しいがゆえに人々から疎まれた。ドイツ語版ではそれがより顕著に表れている。Tag für Tagと、それは「毎日毎日」と繰り返しているが、不正と叫び続け嘲笑と軽蔑され続け、彼はうんざりした。
Versuche in der Theodicée über die Güte Gottes, die Freiheit des Menschen und den Ursprung des Übels: Philosophische Werke Band 4 (Philosophische Bibliothek 499) (German Edition)
Was das Begreifen anlangt, so pflichte ich ihm hierin bei, habe aber schon gezeigt, daß die Mysterien eine Entwicklung des Wortsinnes erheischen, um nicht sine mente soni, leere Worte zu sein: und ich habe auch gezeigt, wie notwendig es ist, auf Einwürfe antworten zu können, da andernfalls die These verworfen werden müßte. Er zitiert theologische
. Er zitiert theologische Autoritäten, welche die Unauflöslichkeit der gegen die Mysterien gerichteten Einwände anzuerkennen scheinen. Einer der ersten ist Luther. Ich habe schon im S 12
sowenig wie die Träume. Wir täuschen uns selbst durch den Gebrauch, den wir davon machen, d. h. durch unsere Folgerungen. Wir lassen uns eben durch Wahrscheinlichkeitsargumente verführen und dadurch werden wir zu der Annahme getrieben, so wie wir die Phänomene oft miteinander verbunden gefunden haben, so müßten sie immer verbunden sein. Da nun alles, was keine Ecken zu haben scheint, für gewöhnlich auch wirklich keine hat, glauben wir leicht, es müßte sich immer so verhalten. Ein solcher Irrtum ist verzeihlich und zuweilen unvermeidlich, wenn wir rasch handeln und das Wahrscheinlichste wählen müssen; haben wir aber Muße und Zeit zur Sammlung, so begehen wir einen Fehler, wenn wir das als sicher hinstellen, was dies gar nicht ist. Die sinnliche Erscheinung befindet sich also oft mit der Wahrheit im Widerspruch, aber unser Urteilsvermögen niemals, wenn es genau den Denkgesetzen gemäß gebraucht wird. Versteht man unter Vernunft ganz allgemein die Fähigkeit, schlecht und recht zu räsonieren, dann gebe ich zu, sie vermag uns zu täuschen und täuscht uns auch wirklich, und zwar sind die Erscheinungen unseres Verstandes ebenso oft täuschend wie die der Sinne: aber es handelt sich hier um die Verkettung der Wahrheiten und um Einwürfe in schulgerechter Form, und in diesem Sinne kann uns die Vernunft unmöglich täuschen.
Dort spendet Gott Gnade und Erbarmen den Unwürdigen; hier spendet er Zorn und Strenge denen, die sie nicht verdient haben; an beiden Stellen zu heftig und unbillig mit Bezug auf die Menschen, aber gerecht und wahrhaft mit Bezug auf sich selbst.
Denn wie das gerecht sein soll, daß er Unwürdige krönt, ist jetzt zwar unbegreiflich, aber wir werden es erkennen, wenn wir dorthin kommen, wo man nicht mehr glauben, sondern das Offenbarte mit eignen Augen schauen wird. Wie es daher gerecht sein soll, daß er die verdammt, welche es nicht verdienen, muß solange geglaubt werden, bis es der Menschensohn uns offenbaren wird.
Nothing in the world is central, just outside the world.
Simone Weil
The question is to what extent we can speak of God and still say that we have perceived him to be trustworthy.
The language of this perception is the Aufheben of theology and philosophy. In the history of philosophy, philosophy has coexisted with God. There was a time when it coexisted with the Greek God and then with the Christian God. When did these two disciplines separate? Was it Nietzsche, Marx and Freud, the triumvirate of thought? Was it Nietzsche, Marx and Freud, or Hobbes’s “state of nature”? I would put it around the first century of the Council of Nicaea. The Fathers of that time said, “Not like philosophers, but like fishermen”, that to reach the depths of humanity was not a human word, like philosophy, which never gets old. But they were then, Benedict XVI argued, stuck in Aristotle’s “homoousis”. He still wished to believe ” more like the fisherman than the philosopher”.
Thomas Aquinas, in his Scholastic philosophy, held that “philosophy is the offspring of theology”. Ockham, in his “Ockham’s Razor”, argued that philosophy should be separated from theology. Nevertheless, Descartes’s proof of the existence of God has been challenged by many philosophers, but even in this century it has not been defeated.
Spinoza advocated “pantheism”, which was considered heretical. Leibniz’s concept of the monad as the atomic equivalent of spiritual existence. Neither the smallest nor the largest of worlds can be grandfathered to us. However, the world was not created by chance, and these monads were “scheduled harmony” in that the world was designed to be the best it could be. Barkley, who was a clergyman, believed that while no one was looking, God was. He called it existence. Kant, a devout Protestant, wrote to Swedenborg, then a mystic, protesting against him, and held that true faith was reason. Hegel, also an empirical believer, objected to Kant’s objectivity as unrecognizable. This is the cessation (Aufheben) of the dialectic. Since the Industrial Revolution, when industrialization led people to work harder, to worry more about the environment, and to question their own well-being, Kant’s dialectic has been the basis for the development of a new way of thinking. began to question their happiness. Faith in Christianity at the time was also waning.
The need for man to have a core conscience and beliefs was symbolized by Nietzsche with the words “God is dead”. Nietzsche identified two kinds of nihilism: active nihilism, in which people create new values for themselves, and passive nihilism, in which people lose hope in life because of the existence of existing values.
Husserl’s phenomenology led to the study of human consciousness, orientation and human perception and existence. With Heidegger, who was a Catholic theologian, he attempted to de-Catholicism the human being as a born-again “Dasein”.
Nevertheless, the “face” of Levinas also led to a return to the Old Testament. Levinas succeeded in refuting Husserl’s ‘interpersonal inertia’. This is Levinas’s ‘l’Autre’.This is Levinas’s ‘theory of the Other’. As you can see in French, it is “”beings who cannot enter my world”. “. He held that recognizing the ‘face’ of the other could resolve this chasm.
Levinas miraculously survived the concentration camps, but the world existed. This formless, subject-less thing that exists even when it is lost is what he calls ‘Ilya’. To him, the person who existed may have looked like the beast of the Apocalypse, which has no name, but only a number.
Quoting from the Old Testament, “Thou shalt not kill”, he said that the way out of the Iliad is to get to know “the face of the other”, to engage with the other from indifference. This philosophy was regarded by John Paul II as a philosopher who should not be forgotten.
It has been said that theology is on the wane. Nevertheless, Balthasar, with his beautiful writing and logic, speaks to us academically and to our emotions about the mystery of the love of the Trinity. Theology, too, has never existed without the philosopher.(Neoplatonism)
Philosophy has probably progressed to the denial of God since the end of Paul Ricoeur coexistence of religion and philosophy. Theology has moved on from a skeleton world to the existence of God as the answer.
In the history of theology there has never been a time when the masses were pure and innocent. It does not seem so far removed from other non-religious histories. It does not seem to be so far removed from other non-religious histories. It is not without its perplexities to take them both, but it is Aufheben. While waiting for the results of science, man follows his perceptions when even science remains imperfect.
Philosophy and theology are probably on the same track.
They are both on the verge of death, and they are both working themselves to death.
As we cut ourselves down, the soul is revealed.
It is our wisdom, our weakness, our strength, our gift.
It is a gift.
The world outside is beautiful. But to be able to be aware of it, we need to love the depths of our inner world. Even if you lose your memory due to illness, your mind and the world are still connected. Even if I forget myself because of illness, God and I are connected. We love many things while we are alive. In time, the outer world may be whittled away by the decline of the body. Still, it is the soul that sees the light. The soul’s sight of the external world is the core of the world.
Chris Kyogetu 