A Lesson from the Faith of the Canaanite Woman

The Matthean narrative on the Canaanite woman’s faith (Matthew 15:21-28) gives an impression as if Jesus were so mean and insulting her.

Every time I teach and speak on this narrative, I am always asked questions like, “Why was Jesus so mean to her (the Canaanite woman)?”, “Was it because she was a Gentile? , “Was Jesus actually a misogynist?”, and so forth.

Was Jesus really mean to the Canaanite woman?

To address such questions, we need to review the story.

Jesus had quite busy days in Galilee, feeding the five thousand (Matthew 14:13-21), rescuing Peter from drowning (14:22-33), healing the sick (14:34-36), dealing with the accusation by the Pharisees (15:20). After all this, he and his disciples came to the region of Tyre and Sidon, to get away. Then, the Canaanite woman came to Jesus and called out to heal her daughter, who was tormented by a demon. At first, Jesus did not say anything to her at all. However, she kept calling and calling. Then, the disciples, who were obviously annoyed by her, suggested Jesus to send her away. It was when Jesus finally opened his mouth and spoke to her, saying, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel”(v. 24). Then, the woman came closer to Jesus and knelt in front of him, saying, “Lord, help me!”(v.25). To this, Jesus said, “It is not right to take the children’s food/bread (artos) and throw it to their dogs”(v.26).

What do you think? Do you think that Jesus was “mean” to the woman?

Suppose if Jesus were really uninterested in helping or ministering to the Canaanite woman, what do you think he would do when his disciples said to him, “Send her away, for she keeps calling out after us!”(Matthew 15:23). Had he been mean or indifferent to her, he would have taken the disciples’ advice and sent her away so that he would not have been disturbed by her anymore.  The fact that Jesus did not take in the disciples’ suggestion to send the Canaanite woman away means that he was, indeed, interested in dealing with her. However, it was obvious that Jesus wanted to challenge her, as he engaged in conversation with her. Therefore, we cannot conclude that Jesus was disinterested in the Canaanite’s woman’s cry.

The fact that Jesus did not accept the disciples’ advice to send the Canaanite woman away is a proof that he was not aloof or unconcerned about her plea for her daughter. Nevertheless, the way he responded to her, after a period of silence, can certainly be provocative.  His words, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel”(v. 24) sure can make you wonder if Jesus were ethnocentric, caring for only his kind of people, the Israelites. Then, his words of his, “It is not right to take the children’s food/bread (artos) and throw it to their dogs”(v.26), can certainly raise eyebrows, giving an impression as if he were regarding the woman a “dog” because she was not an Israelite. If it were the case, what a great insult it would be.

It is certainly quite intriguing that Jesus responded to the Canaanite woman with such provocative words, after some period of silence. However, Jesus has spoke in such an incensingly disturbing way elsewhere. For example, Jesus said, “Do not assume that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law “(Matthew 10:24-35) . This is an example of Jesus’ hyperbolic rhetoric in his teaching. Through this kind of provocative expressions, he tried to make highlight his teaching on the eschatological judgement.  To the Canaanite woman, Jesus responded with his hyperbolic expression to test her faith.

Jesus sure saves us, as his name, “Jesus”, literally means. However, his salvation may not come without some challenges. As the eschatological vision in the Book of Revelation alludes to, the Kingdom of Heaven will not come without series of tribulations. The Revelation also reminds us that only those who pass the test, namely, those who have endured the trials with faith, will enter the Kingdom.  Likewise, Jesus challenged her before he answered her plea to heal her daughter. These provocative words of his in v. 24 and v.26 are the tests that Jesus gave the Canaanite woman to see if the quality of her faith would pass. And, she certainly passed this test of faith. Therefore, v. 24 and v. 26 have nothing to do with a possibility of Jesus being ethnocentric or misogynic at all. In fact, because of the quality of her faith, the Canaanite woman did not seem to have taken this way, either. Rather, she responded to Jesus’ challenges with wisdom and wit, saying, “Yes, Lord, but even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their masters’ table”(v.27). To this, Jesus was obviously impressed and said, “O woman, great is your faith! Let it be done for you as you wish”(v. 28), and her daughter was consequently healed.

To better understand that Jesus used hyperbolically provocative expression to challenge the Canaanite woman’s faith, we can ask, “Why Jesus did not stop the storm immediately when he noticed the disciples were in panic”, in regard to Matthew 14:22-33. Instead of stopping the storm, Jesus was walking on the stormy water toward already-frightened disciples as if he were a ghost, making them aghast. Jesus did not stop the storm immediately, even though he could, so that Peter’s faith can be tested. In Peter’s case, alas, to Jesus’ dismay, his faith did not pass the test, as he let fear overwhelm and began to sink in the water.  Nevertheless, Jesus saved him, as he cried out to him, saying, “Lord, save me!”(14:30). In fact, this plea of Peter is echoed by the plea of the Canaanite woman, “Lord, help me!”(15:25).

As the Canaanite woman had to go through challenges set by Jesus to have her wish granted, we also need to expect certain trials to endure in order to enjoy the salvific effects of Christ.

Yes, Jesus certainly said, “Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks, receives; and the one who seeks, finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened”(Matthew 7:7-8, Luke 11:9-10). However, this does not mean that we will receive what we ask for immediately and easily, as we want.  Rather, this is contingent upon persistence, as Jesus describe through the parable in Luke 11:5-11. In fact, this parable’s lesson to support Jesus’ teaching of prayer, in particular, asking and receiving in prayer, echoes a lesson we can learn from the Canaanite’s woman in Matthew 15:21-28. It is that we receive what we ask, upon ensuring challenges or passing the test of faith, not in the way we want but only as God wishes.

Sometimes we may feel that God does not listen to our prayers, or doubt if God really cares about our prayers.  Then, we may become frustrated with God and even grow angry at God. To overcome this problematic tendency of ours with patience and persistence in our prayer, as taught in Luke 11:5-11, we can take a lesson from the way the Canaanite woman endured the trials and passed the test of faith, in conjunction with the way the widow dealt with the unjust judge in Jesus’ parable (Luke 18:1-8) and the way Hannah patiently and persistently prayed (1 Samuel 1:1-20).

Additionally, it is also important to note that the Canaanite woman overcome the challenges not only with the strength in her faith but also with her humility. “

These words of the Canaanite woman to Jesus’ challenges, “Lord help me! “(Matthew 15:25) and “Yes, Lord, but even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their masters’ table”(15:27) , clearly show that she is humble enough to be satisfied with whatever Jesus can give.  These words of hers also echo this prayer of St. Ignatius of Loyola:

Take, Lord, and receive all my liberty,
my memory, my understanding,
and my entire will,
All I have and call my own.

You have given all to me.
To you, Lord, I return it.

Everything is yours; do with it what you will.
Give me only your love and your grace,
that is enough for me.

In her words in Matthew 15:27, the Canaanite woman also demonstrates her wit along with her humility. Had she lacked humility and humor, her pride would make her react to Jesus’ challenge with anger, feeling insulted to be compared to a dog. However, the way she responded to Jesus’ challenge with such a wit tells that the Canaanite woman is a good example of being “poor in spirit” in the beatitudes (Matthew 5:3).

The faith of the Canaanite woman teaches us that her faith not only makes her prayer so persistent and patient but also makes her witful. No wonder Jesus said, “O woman, great is your faith! Let it be done for you as you wish”  (Matthew 15:28).

A Case Study of Two Types of Faith: Peter’s Faith and Canaanite Woman’s Faith

As we move from the 19th Sunday to the 20th Sunday on Cycle A, it is helpful for us to compare and contrast Peter's faith in the 19th Sunday Gospel story and the Canaanite woman's faith in the 20th Sunday Gospel story to assess and reassess your faith.  This is a good mid-term faith check, as we have passed the middle point of this liturgical year. 
  
                                               *****

Comparing the Gospel narratives of Matthew 14:22-33 (the Gospel reading for the 19^th Sunday A) and that of 15:21-28 (the Gospel reading for the 20^th Sunday A), what is a lesson that we can learn from?  With this question in mind, reading these Gospel stories, a contrast can be drawn between Peter’s faith and Canaanite woman’s faith.   In Matthew 14:22-33, Peter’s weak faith resulted in fear and sinking in the water. In response, Jesus saved him from drowning but rebuked him for his puny faith.  On the other hand, in Matthew 15:21-28, Jesus commended the Canaanite woman’s faith, as she demonstrated to him that nothing can compromise her faith in him.  She did not let the Israelites-Gentiles ethnic division become an obstacle to her faith.

Peter, in spite of his privilege not only to be an Israelite but also one of the first disciples, was not able to demonstrate strong faith.  In contrast, although she is a Gentile, being considered as rather spiritually unclean and perhaps inferior, compared to the Israelites, the Canaanite woman impressed Jesus with her faith.

O you of little faith, why did you doubt? (Matthew 14:31) These words of Jesus to Peter sum up Peter’s faith.  In contrast, the Canaanite woman’s faith is characterized by these words of Jesus: O woman, great is your faith! (Matthew 15:28).

What about you? How is your faith? Is your faith more aligned to the Canaanite woman’s or are you more like Peter? Is your faith often compromised by fear? Does fear shrink your faith? Does your faith enable you to remain resolved and keep your conviction? 

Keeping Us from Theodicy Quagmire Where and When There Seems No God

Charlottesville, Virginia, and Barcelona, Spain……these are the names recently added to a list of troubles in the world.  Some people wonder why God “allows” such troubles to continue…why God does not stop.  Those who are more inclined to theodicy may wonder if God really exists, if He “allows” tragedies after tragedies to happen and does not “intervene”.

Spiritually speaking, to Christians, responding to troubles in the world with the above attitude is a sign of real trouble, because it can lead to a loss of faith or apostasy.

Perhaps, we can juxtapose the reality of the continuing troubles in the world to the storm in Matthew 14:22-33, for example.  Someone may ask, why God does not stop a tragedy in the world or intervene. Likewise, we could ask, why Jesus did not stop the storm immediately or did even “allow” it to happen, in regard to the Gospel narrative. Had Jesus stopped the storm soon or did not “allow” it, Peter and the rest of the disciples of Jesus would not have been scared. However, the Gospel narrative tells that the storm was raging and the disciples were terrified.  While this was going on, what was Jesus doing? He was walking on the stormy water, to which the disciples were frightened, as they thought it was a ghost.

Good grief!?

Realizing that the disciples were rather aghast, Jesus assured them that it was he and told not to be afraid.  To this, as Thomas had to put his finger to risen Jesus’ wound mark (John 20:24-27), Peter had to make sure the man walking on the water like a ghost and identifying himself as the Lord was really him.  So, he said, “Lord, if it is you, tell me to come to you on the water!”(Matthew 14:28). Then, Jesus said to him to come, and Peter began walking on the stormy water! However, as soon as he was distracted by the stormy winds, fear filled him up immediately. And he began to sink in the water, while his heart was already sinking in fear. At least, Peter was able to cry to the Lord. Though Jesus had to rebuke Peter for his little faith, he saved him.

What lesson can we draw by dialectically putting the troubling reality of the world and the above Gospel narrative, paralleling senseless tragedies of violence and terror that God does not stop and the storm that Jesus did not stop immediately?

One thing I can say is that we really do not know why God does not stop all these violence, terror, tragedies, and suffering in the world so that nobody would have died, as we cannot tell why Jesus did not stop the storm immediately so that the disciples would not be in fear. If we tried to pursue this “why God” kind of question, we set ourselves to slip into the quagmire of theodicy, with a great possibility to end with apostasy.  If, I had to come up with a possible explanation to this kind of “why God” question, I may make reference to John 9:3 and 11:4 to remind that the works and the glory of God may be revealed through troubles in the world.  This is not to underestimate or belittle evil that is associated with violence, terror, and all other words of troubles in the world.  Rather, it is not to lose our sight in God – not to be distracted by fears generated by the troubles in the world.  As Peter began to sink in the water as soon as his attention to Jesus on the water by the storm, we may begin to sink in the spiritual entanglement of theodicy.  God forbid, had this happened, what good would come out? It would be a victory of evil.

As  Ecclesia militans, dolens, poenitens, and expectans, we must fight our spiritual battle against evil vigorously so that we shall be Ecclesia triumphans.  For our victory in this battle, we shall never lose our sight in God, no matter how troubling the world may become.  Whether protesting or praying or doing both, we must fix our eyes in the Lord, as we find God not only in all things but also at all time, so that the saving works and the glory of God may manifest amidst and through the troubles in the world. Thus, our suffering in the world may become redemptive. This is also to make sure that those who lost their lives in these violent terrors did not die as mere evil’s preys.

Through our battle, may God’s justice be brought and mercy heal us, while his grace prevailing. 

The Solemnity of the Assumption: Mary’s Inspiring Effect on the Church

Mary’s life’s beginning – conception – is addressed in the Church’s dogmatic declaration in Ineffabilis Deus (1854) and her life’s ending on earth is addressed in Munificentissimus Deus (1950). Based on this, Mary’s life on earth is characterized with gratia plena. It means that Mary was conceived without any trace of the Original Sin and assumed her body and soul entirely into heaven at the end of her earthly life to ensure that she was not affected by the sins of the world. Because of her gratia plena, she was qualified to serve God as Theotokos. 

Though she was gratia plena throughout her entire life on earth, Mary suffered greatly. Her suffering, in fact, had a lot to do with her Son, Jesus.   When Mary and Joseph presented baby Jesus to God in the Temple, Simeon said to Mary, “Behold, this Child is appointed to cause the rise and fall of many in Israel, and to be a sign that will be spoken against, so that the thoughts of many hearts will be revealed. And a sword will pierce your own soul too” (Luke 2:34-35).  Her suffering at the foot of the Cross, witnessing her Son’s agonizing death on the Cross and burying his corpse, has given her the title of Beata Maria Virgo Perdolens, as well as Mater Dolorosa. 

The first reading of the Solemnity of Assumption day Mass, Revelation 11:19a;12:1-6a;10ab, symbolically reflects Mary’s life of suffering and God’s providence for her. Though she was attacked for her child, God spared her life so that she was able to flee herself to safety, while the child was safely born in spite of the difficult circumstances and brought to God’s throne. This narrative tells us that Mary’s life on earth was marked with great suffering. At the same time, it also reminds that Mary had a place for her, prepared by God. This suggests that Mary enjoyed God’s special providence even though she suffered. Because of this, she was able to carry out her mission: giving birth to the Son, who sits on the divine throne.

While the Son is on the throne of God, the woman finds safe place in the wilderness, prepared by God (Revelation 12:5-6). This echoes how the Holy Spirit was poured out from the Father in heaven to the disciples, giving birth to the Church on earth on Pentecost, upon Jesus’ Ascension to the Father in heaven. The woman’s Son, who was taken by God to be enthroned (Revelation 12:5) represents Christ’s Ascension to seat at the right hand of God in heaven (Mark 16:19). Upon Christ’s return to the Father in heaven to be enthroned, the Church was born to this world on Pentecost, as the Holy Spirit was sent down, as Jesus’ promised (John 14:16, 26; 16:7).

Besides giving birth to Christ the Son, Mary served God also as the Mother of the Church. Because the Church was born out of the disciples, including Mary and few other disciples present at the foot of the Cross, and Jesus designated her also as the mother to the disciples from the Cross (John 19:27), the woman, who fled to a special place in the wilderness (Revelation 12:6) makes a symbolic reflection of Mary as the Mother of the Church.

Before we become Ecclesia triumphans to be ready for Parousia, we, the Church need to go through as Ecclesia militans, fighting all the sins and corruptions of the world, and as Ecclesia dolens, bearing consequences of the sins of the world. As Mary’s life on earth was marked with suffering, the Church also go through trials. As the Church overcomes all the impacts of the sins and corruptions of the world, she becomes ready for purification as her final preparation to meet Christ at the heavenly banquet, as envisioned in Revelation 19, echoing memories of the Last Supper. The place in the wilderness can be regarded as the purgatory, which is away from this world to make the final preparation through purification, to meet Christ upon Parousia. Thus, the woman fled to the wilderness in Revelation 12:6 symbolically represents Ecclesia poenitens as her mother.

In symbolically identifying Mary the Mother of Christ and the Mother of the Church with the woman in Revelation 12, we reflect not only the suffering of Mary and the Church but also God’s protective grace to the Church because the Mother of the Church is gratia plena. Just as the woman in Revelation 12 was protected, though suffered, Mary enjoyed God’s full protection from any effects of the sins of the world. Her life on earth began with the Immaculate Conception and completed with the Assumption into heaven to ensure her spiritual purity, though she was fully human. Ever since the Pentecost, we, the Church have had her as the Mother. Given her gratia plena, stemming from the Immaculate Conception, we, the Church sure can fight and overcome all Satan’s attacks with sins in order to become Ecclesia triumphans.

Though we, the Church in this world, continues to struggle, besides having Christ as the head of the Church (1 Corinthians 11:3; Colossians 1:18), we also have Mary as the Mother of the Church. The Father in heaven sent His only begotten Son by impregnating the Immaculate Mary to save us from the sins of the world. It was possible because Mary obeyed God as His servant (Luke 1:38), bearing suffering, as her Son suffered and died. Her suffering, as well as Christ’s suffering and death, was followed by the joy of the Resurrection, marking the triumph of Christ. Then, he Ascended to be at the right hand of the Father in heaven so that the Holy Spirit as another Parakletos is sent, giving birth to the Church out of the disciples, including Mary. With triumphant Christ as the head, with gratia plena Mary as the mother, we, the Church can endure all tribulations and sufferings in our mission to fight attacks of Satan to the triumphant victory.

Salve, Regina, mater misericordiae; vita, dulcedo et spes nostra, salve.
Ad te clamamus exsules filii Hevae. Ad te suspiramus gementes et flentes in hac lacrimarum valle.

Eia ergo, advocata nostra, illos tuos misericordes oculos ad nos converte. Et Iesum, benedictum fructum ventris tui, nobis post hoc exsilium ostende.

O clemens, o pia, o dulcis Virgo Maria.

Oremus. Omnipotens sempiterne Deus, qui gloriosae Virginis Matris Mariae corpus et animam, ut dignum Filii tui habitaculum effici mereretur, Spiritu Sancto cooperante, praeparasti, da, ut cuius commemoratione laetamur; eius pia intercessione, ab instantibus malis et a morte perpetua liberemur. Per eundem Christum Dominum nostrum. Amen.

 Deo gratias! 

被爆国日本：被爆犠牲者の白骨を埋めた焼け土に今咲く白い花を守る為に

二度あることは三度ある、といいますが、昭和２０年８月、わが国に２発も落とされた原爆、絶対に三度目があってはいけません。

しかし、長引く戦争を早期に終結させることで、日本上陸による更なる戦死者の出現を防ぐ為にも、広島と長崎に原爆を投下することは”必要”だったと一貫して主張するアメリカは、２発の原爆を日本に落としてから、寧ろ、核兵器開発にどんどん加速をつけ、対抗するソ連と核兵器開発競争の凌ぎを削ってきました。この米ソ間の競争に、英、仏、中華人民共和国、インド、パキスタン。。。そして、今では北朝鮮、が世界規模での核兵器競争に参加するようになりました。そして、広島、長崎への原爆投下から７２年目の今日、かつての米ソ間の冷戦時代以上の核兵器の脅威に晒されています。核兵器保有国の”仲間入り”をしたがる北朝鮮ですが、世界で最初に核兵器を保有したアメリカへの敵対心を核によってむき出し、アメリカとの核戦争さえも辞さない構えです。

このような原爆投下後の世界の核兵器に関する現実、現状、を考えると、人類は広島と長崎への原爆投下からいったいどのような教訓を得たといえるのでしょうか?　そして、今年(2017) の7月、日本は国連において、核兵器廃絶への核兵器禁止条約 (Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons)に批准しませんでした。世界唯一の被爆国である日本がこの条約を事実上ボイコットしたということは世界を驚かせました。こうしたことからも、いったいわが国は広島と長崎の教訓を活かしているのか、疑わざるを得ません。

このような日本の摩訶不思議な態度の背景には、日米同盟の盾の裏にあるアメリカの目に見えない差し金があることが考えられます。日米同盟というのは、ある意味ではアメリカの核の傘による保護というようにも特徴付けられるように、日本は核兵器保有国とならなくても実質てきには核保有国のように、この同盟により在日米軍が保有する核兵器によって守られているというものなのです。建前上、日本は非核ですが、本音というか本質においては、日米同盟による在日米軍ゆえ、実質的には核兵器保有国と同じなのです。そして、このような現状が今でも可能なのは、実は、広島と長崎への原爆投下直後の一部の日本政府関係者達の対米姿勢から始まったのです。なぜならば、原爆投下からすぐ後に、彼らは戦勝国となることが時間の問題とわかっていたアメリカに対して媚を売り始める為にアメリカへ非常に協力的になろうとし、アメリカが原爆投下が実際の人体にどのような影響を与えるかについての科学的、医学的、データを何よりも欲しがっていたことを察知しており、被爆によって死亡した人たちを病理解剖し、まだ生きていた被爆者達に様々な人体実験といえるようなことを医療行為のようにみせかけて行ってきました。勿論、こうした日本人医師達やその背後にある政府関係者達の意図は、被爆者への思いからではなく、自分達がアメリカから”日本の優等生”と見られたいという欲望によるものだといえます。つまり、同じ日本人でありながら、彼らは自分達が原爆を投下したアメリカという国から好意的に見られたいという理由から、被爆者達を利用したといっても過言ではないといえます。そして、こうした背景の産物が、今でもその一部が広島にのこっている原爆傷害調査委員会(Atomic Bomb Casualty Commission)です。ここでは今でも被爆者の追跡調査を医学的に行うだけで、被爆者に必要な治療などはいっさい行いません。

まだ終戦前、原爆投下直後から一部の日本人が原爆投下を自分達の対米政治的利益追求の為に利用していたことと、昨年、日本が国連で核兵器廃絶への国際条約を唯一の被爆国であるにもかかわらず批准しなかったことは無関係ではないと考えられます。

確かに、現在進行形のアメリカと北朝鮮による核兵器に関する緊張増大もハラハラさせる大きな課題ですが、やはり、日本人としてそれ以上に真剣に考えておくべきことは、やはり、こうしたわが国内部にある、盲目的対米追従に潜む核兵器の脅威に対する無頓着さだといえます。

戦後から現在にかけての地政学的情勢を鑑みれば、日米同盟はいたしかたなく日本の安全保障にとって必要です。国際法でも自然法でも支持される集団的自衛権の行使そもものが問題であるわけでもなく、本当に恐ろしいのは、日本人の中に、広島と長崎で見せ付けられた核兵器の恐ろしさの現実に今でも盲目で、それを世界で一番最初に開発、投下、そしてその開発競争覇権の座を死守せんとするアメリカの核兵器政策を全面的にバックアップすることで甘い汁のおすそ分けを欲しがっている人たちです。彼らの目には、被爆して苦しんでいる人たちへの共感などはなく、こうした状態をどのように自分達の利益とつなげていくかとしか考えられない人たちなのですから。

二度あった、しかも、わが国日本に被られた原爆投下、三度目を絶対に許してはいけません。もし、ここで失敗すれば、２，６７０年以上途切れなく続く世界で稀な日本の皇室も、万世一系の天皇を君主とする日本の国体維持だけでなく、日本人を含めた世界人類、世界全体そのもの、地球全体が破壊されるでしょう。そして、こうした核兵器開発競争の究極的終焉までの間に多大な利潤を得た、かつて広島と長崎で呻き苦しみながら、水を求め続けながら、蛆虫に食われ続けながら強烈な悪臭を放ちながら死んでいった被爆者達を政治利用して利益を得た人たちの末裔は、アメリカの核兵器推進派と一緒に秘密裏に開発されていた宇宙船で破壊寸前の地球から脱出していることでしょう。勿論、その後に必ず、核兵器とは比べ物にならない神による裁きがあるのですが。

”ふ～るさ～とのまち焼かれ、身寄りの骨埋めし焼け土に～。今は白～い花さ～く。ああ、許すまじ原爆を～、三度許すまじ原爆を～。” 浅田石二作詞, “原爆を許すまじ”

原爆によって犠牲となった方々の焼土の中の（白）骨と、戦後、復興した被爆地に咲く白い花の修辞的コントラストは私達に何を訴えんとしているのでしょうか?　　今を生きる私達が、原爆を三度許すまじ続ける限り、かつての地獄には美しい白い花が咲き続けることができます。

原爆投下で白骨化した犠牲者達の魂が今年もまたかつての焼け土に白い花を咲かせてくれます。そして、この白い花は、1968年の核拡散防止条約(Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons) よりも更に上の, 被爆者の思いをより一層反映している2017年の核兵器禁止条約 (Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons) が目指す 核兵器がない平和な世界への思いを象徴するものでもあります。しかし、かつて、被爆によって苦しんでいる人たちを自分達の対米利益追求の手段として利用した一握りの心なき日本人の末裔達がいつこの白い花を踏みにじり永遠に枯らしてしまうか分りません。そして、この白い花がもう見られなくなった暁に、三度目の惨事が起こり得るのです。これは留意すべく預言でもあります。

無常と恒常の共存と友情：方程式でもって無常と恒常共存のパラドックスを解決! ベン図を用いて視覚的に理解!

ある同級生からこう言われました。。。”仲田くんって、今でも変わってないところがあるのね”。彼女が具体的に私のどういったことが学生時代から変わってないかということについてはこの場では割愛させていただきますが、そう言われた時、学生時代を思い出し、にたにたしながら暫く考えてしまいました。で、いったい何を考えていたかというと、ある哲学的パラドックスなんです。それは何かというと、無常と恒常という正反対で一見お互い相容れられないと考えられている事象についてです。しかし、高校卒業後早くも３０年以上経ち、お互い容貌などにおいては否めない変化があるにもかかわらず、この同級生から、私の今でも変わっていないところをビシっと指摘されると、思わず、無常と恒常ということについて考えてしまったのです。

私自身の見た目以上に、彼女の肉眼には高校時代の私にくらべ加齢などによる変貌した、”仲田くんって（学生時代はとても’イケメン’でかっこよかったのに?）あんな’おっさん’になってしまったんだ”、と言ってもおかしくない今の私の姿が映っていたでしょうが、彼女の心の眼から見れば、現在の私と３０年以上も前の学生時代の私の間には何か肉眼では見えない共通のもの、つまり、時間の経過などに伴う変化に影響されない恒常なものが認識できたと考えられます。さすが、才色兼備のこの同級生、今でも見る眼があります。学生時代から彼女には普通目に見えない何かを洞察できる能力がある。それ故、肉眼で見える、というか、五感で認識できる世界では諸行無常であっても、心の眼でもって同じ諸行無常の現実を違う観点から見ることで無常の現実に潜んでいる恒常性を認識できるのです。

つまり、五感だけに頼らず、心の眼で洞察することで、五感の世界では諸行無常の現実に恒常性のある何かを認識することができるのです。こうしたテーマについて詳しく知りたいのであれば、私自身が長い年月の学生生活をかけてやったように、まず生物学で神経と感覚について、そして、心理学で認知、認識、のメカニズムについて学び、更に、哲学や神学、宗教学、などを学ぶことでこうしたことについてより抽象化して、形而上学的に考察してみるといいでしょう。

しかし、そのような面倒なことをせず、実は、恒常性が無常性の中に見出せるという真実は、中学一年の数学で習い始める関数のモデルを比喩として説明できます。関数というのは最低二つの変化のある事象の相関性を数学的に示すものです。更に、複数の事象が相互に変化していくことに途切れがない連続性がなければ関数としてこれらの相関性を議論できませんので、まさに常に変化し続ける無常事象の比喩にピッタリです。ここでは便宜上、相互に変化しあう事象の数を二つと限定し、それらをXとYとします。そして、これらの変化する二つの事象の関係をY=F（X）とします。そして、F（X）、つまり、Yは、aXのn 乗、そしてその次の項が  bX  の（n-1）乗、更にその次の項が  cX の（n-2  ）乗というようにn=0となるまで多くの項が順次次数を下げながら連なっていきます。そして、Xを含んだ項の後に特定の実数が付き、これをDとすればD>０、または、D=0となります。グラフにすれば、DはX=0の時のY軸との接点におけるYの値に等しいものです。こうした二つの常に変化する事象をXとYという変数で示すとこれらの関係をしめす方程式の項にa, b, c,　実数で示す定数があります。これらは、XとYの変化を帰納的に検証すれば方程式があぶりだされる際に必然的にはじき出されます。実は、XとYという変数に対するa, b, c といった各項にある定数というのが、変数で示される無常の現実の中にある恒常性なのです。

 

F（X）＝Y　＝aXのn 乗＋bX  の（n-1）乗　＋　 cX の（n-2  ）乗＋。。。。。。＋X＋Dという高次多項式で表記される関数が示すようにXとYという常に連続性をもって相互に変化していく諸行無常の現実の中においても、数学的帰納法のような洞察力を有する心の眼で改めて検証すれば、各項にある定数のような恒常性を見出すことができるのです。そして、この方程式で変数と定数は切っても切れない縁にあるように、無常と恒常とは別々の完全に独立した事象であるとは必ずしも限らず、一つの方程式のように共存することもあるのです。

無常と恒常が同時に共存することができるという真実を見いだすことができない人は、哲学的にいえば、dualism（二元論）というeither orといった二つに一つしかない、これら二つが同時に共存することはない、としか考えられない、ちょっと頭が固い考え方に縛られていつとも考えられます。しかし、脳みそをちょっとほぐしてみるとeither orから  both andという見方をすることができるようになります。このことは小学校の算数で既に習い始めているベン図をつかった二つの事象の包含関係を視覚化すれば、小学生にでもこうした無常と恒常という二つの違う事象が、（無常）∩（恒常）というようなパターンよりも、寧ろ、（無常）  ＞（恒常）という包含関係があると考えられるので恒常を示すベン図の円が無常を示すベン図の円の中に含まれるように描くことができます。つまり、恒常性というのは無常性の中によって洞察力を使うことで見出すことがきるということです。しかし、キリスト教的に考えると、寧ろ、（無常）∩（恒常）のほうが適切だといえます。なぜならば、神が創造したすべては諸行無常の法則の下にあり、創造主である神は唯一の恒常性をもつ存在であるにもかかわらず、ヨハネの福音書１：１と１４で示されているように、ロゴスの形でもある普遍的恒常性の神がイエスという人間の体でもってこの諸行無常の世界に出現し、人間と交わることで、無常と恒常の交わり、つまり、（無常）∩（恒常）ができたということになります。もし、dualism的に恒常と無常を完全に切り離してしまえば、神は存在していても、人間を含めた自分の創造物を放ったらかしにしているという事になってしまいます。このような考え方はヨハネの福音書にあるようなキリスト教の考えには沿うものではありません、というか、そのような考えにおいてはイエスという神であり父なる神の御子であるイエスのchristologicalな意義がなくなってしまいます。

キリストを信じ、その意義が理解できる人は、（無常）∩（恒常）。そして、キリストについてよくわからない人でもdualismという考え方に染まっていなければ（無常）  ＞（恒常）というパターンで無常と恒常の一見、対の関係にある二つの事象が同時に共存する真実をベン図によって視覚的にも把握できます。そして、どちらにせよ、諸行無常の世界に存在する人間がその中に見出せる恒常性を見出すには、XとYで表される二つの同時に変化しあう変数を帰納的（数学的帰納法）に洞察、検証することで、無常性の中に潜んでいる恒常性を、二つの変数の変化を帰納的に検証することで定数を見出し方程式を導き出すという関数の醍醐味につなげて理解できるのです。

先述の同級生から見て、私がこのように、関数やベン図の概念と結びつけて無常と恒常の同時共存を説明することは、学生時代からこのように、興味のある人にとってはとても興味深い話（興味のない人にとってはわけがまったくわからない話）で物事を説明する癖がある事実とまったく変わっていないと認識されるでしょう。ということは、意識していない時ほど他人から認識されるような一生治らない自分の癖というのも、無常の中に見出される普遍的恒常性なのかもしれません。

私からみれば、一緒に過ごした懐かしい学生時代から３０年以上経って今では変わってしまった彼女の容貌の中に秘められた今でも変わっていない彼女の恒常性を見出すことができます。その一つが、今の変貌した私の姿の中に潜む学生時代から変わっていない私の恒常性を見出すという洞察力なのです。彼女も私も、学生時代以来３０年以上ものあいだお互い違う道を歩みながらいろいろと変貌してきましたが、こうしたお互いの洞察力にも特徴付けられる友情というベン図の交わりのような恒常性を共有し、それで結ばれているのです。

それにしても、数学って、とてもおもしろいものですね。というのは、このような、同級生との懐かしい感情を分かち合う体験を比喩的に表現する道具にもなるのですから。。別に数学を毎日使いながら給料もらっている人でなくても、ただ点数とって進級、卒業したり、入試に合格してから、もう終わり、とするにはもったいないです。ちなみに私が学生時代、数学、嫌いではありませんでしたが、このように考えて数学を勉強した覚えはありません。ということは、こうした私の考えは、加齢とともに起った変化の産物なのでしょう。数学は嫌いではなく寧ろ好きな科目だったので、いまでもこうして、専門でもない数学と楽しみながら付き合う自分というのは、加齢などによる変化の中に見出される恒常性であり、その楽しみ方になにか学生時代にはなかった新しいものがあるということ私の数学に対する好意的な対象関係という恒常性と今共存する無常性の一つだと考えていいかと思います。

                                                                           +++++ 

数学的比喩による無常と恒常の共存性についての私のまわりくどい比喩的説明のまとめ：

無常性。。X,Yで表される変数

恒常性。。これらの変数の相関性を示す関数の方程式にみられる定数

これらの包含関係は、イエスという聖書にでてくる人間が神でもあるキリストであること、つまり、christologicalな理解のある人にとって、、（無常）∩（恒常）、そして、そうでない人にとって、（無常）  ＞（恒常）。但し、どちらにせよ、dualismによる弊害を受けていない思考法をもっていることが前提です。

A Prophetic Lesson by Juxtaposing Evil “Transfiguration” in Hiroshima and the Divine Transfiguration on Mt. Tabor

Because an atomic bomb was used to kill innocent people for the very first time in history on the Feast of the Transfiguration of the Lord (August 6) in Hiroshima, 1945, this feast day has borne something prophetic in confronting evil in disguise and in human heart. It is not easy to discern this in light of what this feast is about – weighing on a manifestation of evil in the “transfiguration” of Little Boy in Hiroshima to the first known revelation of the divine glory of Jesus on Mt. Tabor.

The Transfiguration of the Lord marks a shift in Jesus’ ministry journey, beginning to set eyes on Jerusalem, where suffering and death await.  Likewise, the “transfiguration” of Little Boy on the feast of the Transfiguration of the Lord in 1945 has become a turning point in the world to have increasing anxiety of nuclear war and possible destruction of the entire planet earth by nuclear incineration.

Following Peter’s confession of Jesus’ messianic identity (Matthew 16:13-20) and Jesus’ first foretelling of his impending death (Matthew 16:21-28), the divine glory of Jesus was made visible through his transfiguration on Mt. Tabor (Matthew 17:1-8). It was around the midpoint of Jesus’ public ministry, which spans from the recruitment of the first batch of his disciples in Capernaum to his death on the Cross in Jerusalem. The Transfiguration was characterized with Jesus’ face shining like the sun and his garments as white as the light (Matthew 17:2). Theologically, this event signals that Jesus, who is divine, was to enter in his salvific passion to die on the Cross so that the glorious triumph of the Cross is celebrated in his glorious Resurrection. This is why the Transfiguration is the theme for the 2^nd Sunday of Lent on all cycles in the liturgical calendar. In addition, the Transfiguration of the Lord also alludes to the Kingdom of Heaven at the eschaton, beyond all the tribulations, as envisioned in the Book of Revelation.

Before Peter’s confession and the Transfiguration, Jesus’ public ministry was mainly conducted in Galilee. Then, upon the Transfiguration, for the latter half of his public ministry, it became clear that Jesus was to suffer and die in Jerusalem, as the ultimate sacrifice to atone our sins, but to resurrect, as prophesized in Psalm 22 and Isaiah 53.

The dazzling atomic light, brighter than the sun, at the “transfiguration” of Little Boy in Hiroshima signifies the beginning of the age of anxiety over nuclear war toward the end of the world. The United States had thought that their use of the atomic bomb in Hiroshima would not only fasten to end the war with Japan but also to deter Soviet Union’s potential rivalry in the global hegemony competition. Contrary to this, it has resulted in an escalating nuclear arms race between these two super powers during the era of Cold War and beyond. Rather than making the United States and its allies, including its former enemy, Japan, secure under the umbrella of the American nuclear arms, not only the Unites States and its allies but the rest of the world has been put under a constant threat of a grave nuclear war. Rather than peace and security under the American nukes, what we have gotten, as a result of the “transfiguration” of Little Boy is perpetual fear and anxiety.  Clearly, the Little Boy’s “transfiguration” is evil, though those who like to twist with their theodicy may regard it as a “divine” intervention for “justice” to end the war between the United States and Japan, saving many lives from a possibility for further prolonging of the bloody war. For them, no hater how horrific the countless deaths of innocent civilians of Hiroshima might be, it was nothing but a morally justifiable “collateral damage” for this “justice”.

Ever since this evil “transfiguration”, which brought a hell in Hiroshima on the Feast of the Transfiguration of the Lord in 1945, the world has amassed far more nuclear weapons necessary to destroy not only the entire humanity but also to bring the total destruction of the planet earth. In the mean time, the nuclear arms race has brought irreparable damages to the earth. Radiation contaminations and ozone layer damages through over 1,000 times of testing are just to name a few. On this Feast day, the world is quite anxious about a possible nuclear war between North Korea and the United States.

It has some truth to the United States’ moral justification for the “transfiguration” of Little Boy in Hiroshima as we cannot deny that more people would have died for sure, if the war had to prolong and that the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki prompted Japan to surrender rather than further fighting. However, it is also clear to see evil in moral disguise in this matter, because we cannot deny an alternative possibility to end the war without the nuclear “transfiguration” in Hiroshima (Little Boy) and Nagasaki (Fat Man).

Through their intelligence analysis, as early as mid July of 1945, the United States was already aware of Japanese Emperor’s explicitly expressed desire to end the war. It was also known to the US intelligence that the Emperor was pressing his ministers to find a way to negotiate with the United States as soon as possible for a peaceful reconciliation. To this, Joseph Grew, former US ambassador to Japan, offered himself to be sent to Tokyo , as a US envoy, to negotiate with Japan. He hoped that President Truman would welcome his offer. However, Truman flatly rejected Grew’s offer, thus, closing a possibility to end the war without the nuclear “transfiguration”.

Unbeknownst to Grew, it was just before the Manhattan Project was about to complete with an actual testing in the New Mexico desert. Therefore, accepting Grew’s offer to start the negotiation before the completion of the Manhattan Project would void the Project. Originally, the Project was to bomb Nazi Germany. However, Germany surrendered while the Project was still in progress. Because Japan was still in battle with the US, rather than scrapping, the Manhattan Project was carried out to its completion to bomb Japan. To ensure that the Project would not be cancelled prematurely, the United States had to make sure that Japan would not surrender before the products of the Project were actually used against Japan. Thus, the “transfiguration” of Little Boy in Hiroshima had to happen.

Considering this, the “transfiguration” in Hiroshima was made possible by killing the alternative possibility to end the war, offered by Joseph Grew.  Knowing this fact, there is less credibility to make a moral justification for killing innocent civilians of Hiroshima by Little Boy’s “transfiguration” and killing of innocent citizens of Nagasaki by Fat Man’s “transfiguration” 3 days later. At the same time, it is true that some Japanese army leaders stubbornly insisted to continue the battle even after the Fat Man’s “transfiguration” in Nagasaki, until the very last person in Japan to die, defying the Emperor’s wish. Given this, we cannot completely invalidate the United State’s “justification” of the nuclear “transfigurations” in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. However, one thing is clear and undisputable about what the “transfiguration” of Little Boy on the Feast of the Transfiguration has brought about, and it is the increasing danger toward the total destruction of all the life on earth and the earth itself through a greater nuclear “transfiguration” far brighter than the sun.

Perhaps, by juxtaposing the “transfiguration” of Little Boy in Hiroshima on the Feast of the Transfiguration of the Lord, 1945 ( as well as the “transfiguration” of Fat Man in Nagasaki on August 9, 1945) to the Transfiguration of the Lord – discerning a difference between the Little Boy’s “transfiguration” light brighter than the sun and Jesus’ transfiguration light as bright as the sun, we can draw an important prophetic lesson. In this lesson, we can reflect, once again, what the Transfiguration teaches us in regard to Jesus’ passion, death, and resurrection – the meaning of his Cross and its glorious triumph, not to be fooled and confused by Satan’s work manifesting in man-made hell by transfiguring an atomic bomb. If we fail to distinguish what is evil in disguise of “transfiguration” and what is divine in the Transfiguration, not only we remain morally fool enough to justify evil and allow Satan to manipulate human mind and hands to destroy God’s creation, including the humans and the plane earth.

The world is dangerous enough to be on the brink of total nuclear war, as a result of the “transfiguration” of Little Boy. By drawing a prophetic lesson from this evil “transfiguration” brought by some humans, prompted by Satan, we must shift the tide of history to what the divine Transfiguration of the Lord is meant.