A Tasteless Bible Study - Lost in Translation

The original New Testament and Septuagint (LXX, Greek translation of Tanakh) were written in Greek.  On the other hand, the original Old Testament (Tanakh ) was written in Hebrew. However, when we read an English translation bible, we cannot fully encounter the original text’s meaning in its translated letters. It is because some original nuances are inevitably lost in translation.

For example, in an English translation New Testament, the word, “love”, cannot adequately convey the original Greek text’s unique nuances. For example, in the original Greek language New Testament, there is “agape”( ἀγάπη), and there is “philia” (φιλία). These are not the same words and not necessarily synonyms, either. However, both of these Greek words were simply translated as “love” in English.

In John 21:15, Jesus asks Peter, "Simon, son of John, do you love me more than these?" In response, Peter said to Jesus, "Yes, Lord; You know that I love You." Then, Jesus said to Peter, "Tend my lambs."  In this dialogue between Jesus and Peter, when Jesus asks Peter if he loves him, Jesus was referring to “agape”, using its derivative form, “ἀγαπᾷς”(agapas), while Peter answers with a derivative of “phileo” (philia’s verb form) , φιλῶ (philio).   

While “agape” demands self-sacrifice, “phila” is a friendly and caring affection.  It is rather close to “storge” (στοργή), which is a caring relationship that holds families and friends together. Though “phila” shows genuine care, it is does not suffice the kind of love Jesus wants from Peter. So, in John 21:16, Jesus asks Peter, again, "Simon, son of John, do you love me?" To this, Peter answers, "Yes, Lord; you know that I love you." Then, Jesus said to Peter, "Shepherd my sheep." Again, Jesus asks if Peter is ready to love him with the level of “agape” by using its derivative word, ἀγαπᾷς (agapas). But, once again, Peter’s answer remains to be the level of “philia”, as using its derivative word, φιλῶ (philo). So, Jesus asks Peter on more time, in John 21:17, "Simon, son of John, do you love me?"  This time, Jesus changed the word, from “agape”’s delivative, ἀγαπᾷς (agapes), to “phileo”’s delivative, Φιλεῖς (phileis). To this, Peter answered, "Lord, you know all things; you know that I love you”, once again, using “phiia”’s delivative, “φιλῶ”(philio).

In reading John 21:15-17, many people often ask, “Why did Jesus have to ask Peter ‘do you love me’ three times?”, thinking that Jesus repeated the same question three times to Peter. But, whether he actually wrote his Gospel in Greek or another language, such as Aramaic, it is obvious that John shows that Jesus did not repeat the same question three times to Peter. 

This may affect the way we interpret the text, because some people comment that Jesus had to ask Peter, “Do you love me?”, three times to get even with him, because he betrayed Jesus three times.  Knowing that Jesus actually did not repeat the same question three times, based on the original Greek text, we know that such an interpretation does not seem credible. 

Because of a “lost-in-translation” facto, reading an English translated bible for your bible study without making appropriate reference to the text’s corresponding Greek or Hebrew words and phrases, may misguide you in interpreting and leave you out with interesting insights. 

A good bible study or scripture study program must make references to the corresponding original Greek or Hebrew texts to retain the differential nuances of certain original words.

                                             ............................

The original Greek New Testament, Septuagint (LXX, Greek translation of the Old Testament (Tanakh)) and Hebrew Tanakh (Torah =Teaching, Pentateuch,  Nevi'im = Prophetic books, and Ketuvim = Other writings) are  like raw sugar cane juice, while an English translated biblical texts iare like white sugar water.

A sugar solution water does not have a flavor and no nutritional value at all, except for calories, while sugar cane juice is rich with flavors, vitamins and minerals. When raw sugar cane juice is refined to white sugar, all these flavors, minerals, and vitamin are lost in the process. 

Losing unique nuances that differentiate “agape” and “phila”….”pneuma” and “parakletos” in translating the original Greek New Testament into English, for example,  is like how sugarcane juice’s flavors, minerals, and vitamins are lost in the refinement process to make white sugar. 

Is your bible study as tasteless as white sugar water, or as rich in flavor, taste, and nutrients, as raw sugar cane juice? It depends on whether your bible study program makes reference to original Greek and Hebrew texts, as necessary, when you explore and interpret the texts.

楠正成の遺訓が教える個人主義と和の精神の盲点

“七生報国”で有名な楠正成の遺戒には、“みだりに他人に盲従してはならない”という言葉がある。

ある意味では、この遺訓が謂わんとしているのは、それが絶対に正しいならば、何が何でも、例え、自分の命をが犠牲になろうとも、自分の信念を貫け、という武士道的な精神ではなかろうか。いや、自分の信念というよりも、寧ろ、自分の実存的な意義、つまり、自分がこの世に生まれ、今生きていいる意義、理由の為に、一生懸命、生き抜くことでもある。そして、こうした意義の中に、自分のアイデンティティーと密接に係わる自分の信念があり、また、自分が愛する神、人や国などへの契り、約束、そして、その実践などがある。自分の信念とはいえぞ、それは、自分の人生の目的はただ自分の為に生きているのではなく、寧ろ、愛する神、人や国の為に生きているのであるという理解と信条である。

他人への盲従を戒めるというと、一見、集団行動に対する一種の批判と思う人もいるであろう。

確かに、個人主義的な感じを与えないわけでもないが、はっきり言って、個人主義、つまり、自分の都合勝手さを正当化するような戒訓ではない。そもそも、自分の信念といえぞ、その信念が自分の実存的価値を自己ではなく、自分と愛するものの対象、例えば、神、人、国などとの対象関係に見出すのであれば、楠木正成のこの遺訓は個人主義を肯定するものではないことがわかる。

楠正成

一般論的にみて、日本人の心理の特徴は日本人の集団行動性にあると指摘したのは、昭和３０年代前半の南博である。丁度、戦後の高度成長期への登り坂を駆け上っている最中であり、いわゆる集団就職などで有名な団塊の世代が台頭してくる前夜期でもある。

実は、南博の日本人集団行動性論が戦後唱えられる遥か以前、既に８世紀の奈良時代に聖徳太子がその十七条憲法を通して、日本人の徳は和の精神を重んずるところにあると示し、当時形成されてまだ新しい律令国家としての日本を和の精神でもって治めることを善しとした。つまり、日本人の集団行動性の根本的要素には和の精神があると考えられる。それ故、和の精神でもって日本の土着宗教から体系化された神道を解釈しなおし、天皇を中心とした国体思想も生まれた。こうした国体思想では、天皇を親とする大家族的な国家、つまり、国という家族というイメージもある。

しかし、一方、和の精神を振りかざし、明治維新以降、それを更に帝国主義を正当化させる手段としたり、昭和１２年に勃発した日中戦争あたりに台頭し始めた国粋主義といった過激な政治思想にまで変遷させられてしまった苦い歴史もある。皮肉なことに、国粋主義という形の国体主義は、国体破壊の寸前にまで至らしめたことを忘れてはならない。日本をこのような荒廃にまでもたらしめた背景には、当時、天皇陛下の名を悪用し和の精神や国体思想を国粋主義という間違った方向へ突き進ませていた軍政権力に対しての臆病さ故、自分の身への危険を恐れ、権力という強力な他人の集団に盲従してしまったことがある。

また、日本には古来から村意識があり、村八分という習慣もあった。これは、集団の和という名目で“出る釘”を打つのではなく、寧ろ、それを摘み捨てるようなものであり、排他的な集団行動性である。国粋主義た台頭していた頃の村八分は、“非国民”のレッテルをはり、徹底的につまみ出す弾圧であった。

よって、みだりに他人に盲従してなならぬという警訓は、日本の和の精神を、弾圧的な国粋主義や排他的な村意識へと悪用させてなはらないという意味をも含蓄しているのではないだろうか。

つまり、楠正成のこの遺訓は、“鶏口となるも牛後となるなかれ”、という中国の故事につながるものがある。

自分の信念を、例えそれが自分を孤立させようとも、例え、一匹狼となっても、最後までその信念を貫き通す為に、命を張ってでも戦い抜くということである。更に、たとえそのことにより“和の精神”や調和への挑戦であるとみなされ、多数派から弾圧されようとも、正しい自分の信念を命を張って貫くことである。例え、信念により自分が死を選ばらざるを得なくても、七度生まれてまでも、その信念の為に戦い抜くということである。

日本には“長いものに巻かれろ”という言葉があるが、これはフィリピンのタガログ語にあるpakikisamaという、馴れ合い主義に似ている。こうした長いもの、つまり、多数派、既成の政治的経済的勢力といった強力な者が人間としての良識に反することに勇敢に対抗せず、自分の身への危険、あるいは、形だけの“和の精神”や調和に風波を立てることを恐れるがゆえ、臆病となることことでもある。これこそ、恥とすべき、臆病であり、個人主義そのものではないか。つまり、自己防衛、自己保存の為に、自分の良識にそった信念を押し殺し、“和の精神”や集団的調和を悪用する多数派勢力に呑まれていく、本当の意味での自己喪失という恐ろしい精神病理でもある。

本来の日本の和の精神や国体思想を穢そうとする者たちは、こうした日本の集団行動性にある美徳を自分達の政治的、財政的欲望追求の為に悪用し、しっかりとした批判的思考検証能力に欠けたり、勇気が欠如している者、また、幼年期からの愛着関係の発達問題による情緒的不安定でアイデンティティーがあやふやな者などを扇動し、日本人特有の集団行動性を集団悪の行動心理的原動力としてしまう危険をはらんでいる。

私たち良識ある日本人は、この盲点をしっかりと認識しつつ、和の精神や国体思想に特徴付けられる日本人の集団行動性の良さを守り抜くという使命を信念とし、それを命を張ってでも貫くことの大切さを改めて確認する上でも、この楠正成の“みだりに他人に盲従してはならない”という遺訓を警訓、遺戒とすべきではなかろうか。この遺訓は、個人主義の問題と、和の精神の悪用されがちな盲点への警訓でもあるといえよう。

私達は、自分が命を張ってでも貫き通し、守り通す信念を持っているか、そして、それが何であるか、常に問い正し続けねばならない。そして、その信念には、愛する神、人、国といったものがあり、こうした信念を共有できる対人関係、共同体、国、を世界のどの国の文化よりもより良く特徴付けるのが、日本古来の和の精神であり、国体思想である。また、他人に盲従することなく自分が信じる神への信仰、信念を命を賭けてでも守り通すのは、殉教の勇気ある精神でもあり、それは、ある意味では、死すことにその本質を見出す葉隠にある武士道精神の骨頂との共通項でもある。こうした形で、七生報国の精神で神への信仰を守り通すことで、神の国の国体とその和が維持され続けるのでもある。

Empathy - Einfühlung : An Absolutely Necessary Factor for Minimizing Re-Traumatization of Sexually Assaulted Victims

Having counseled many sexually assaulted victims, one thing that always sticks to my mind is that rape victims are re-traumatized when they were physically examined by physicians for treatment and investigation. Further re-traumatization occurs as these victims were interviewed by prosecuting attorney(s) and attorney(s) defending perpetrators.

Imagine what it would be like for a woman, whose sexual part was violated traumatically, upon being forcibly undressed and her leg tore open with violent forces, to be put on a physician’s examination seat, being asked to open her legs – for the sake of necessary medical treatment and obtaining legal evidence.

As they were put in the examination room, the victims have to open their legs, shortly after their perpetrators forcibly tore open their legs.  Even for the sake of necessary medical care and legally required investigation, this procedure is re-traumatizing, given that it is conducted shortly after the traumatic assault.

Victims of traumas, including sexual assaults, almost always experience and exhibit catatonia. They can hardly mobilize their bodies and body parts. This is particularly so with the parts affected most. But, an examining physician and assisting nurse(s) constantly ask victims to cooperate medical procedure and legal investigation by opening legs – when victims’ bodies are still catatonic.

In order to heal from catatonic effects of trauma, victims need some time and safe space. However, post-sexual-assault medical and legal procedure must be conducted as soon as possible to prevent medical complications, including infection, and to obtain legal evidence for perpetrator prosecution.

Psychologically, it is better to wait until the victims’ emotional stability is recovered up to a certain level to go through the medical procedure that requires their legs to be opened again and to have their sensitive and sacred anatomical part touched by another person.  However, in reality, medically and legally, rape victims are to be examined as soon as possible upon the assaults to prevent pathophysiological complication and to preserve prosecutor evidence.  This is a dilemma in working for healing and justice for sexually assaulted victims.

As a mental health clinician and pastoral minister, I do all I can to facilitate the victims’ healing and new psycholospiritual growth, focusing on their unique inner strengths. For this, I gently guide their attention to unearth what is not destroyed and lost – whatever sustained the traumatic assault – to rebuild their personhood anew.  Spiritually and pastorally, I also apply some biblical narratives, such as the post-exilic restorative narratives, to ignite the victims’ new hope and strengths, for healing and post-traumatic growth. However, a mental health clinician, like myself, is not the first helping professional that victims have to see.  They have no choice but to have a re-traumatizing physical examination by a physician, followed by attorney(s)’s investigatory interviews.  Victims seek psychological and spiritual care after such re-traumatizing and stressful procedures are over.

By the time victims seek professional psychological and spiritual care, they have gone through additional traumas and stress, because of this frustrating reality.

Though re-traumatizing and highly stressful, these physical examination, which requires the victims to open catatonic legs, and distressing investigative interviews are necessary medically and legally. Thus, there is a dilemma between the psychological -spiritual interests for the victims and the medical-legal interests for the victims. 

Whether you are a physician, or an attorney, or a psychologist, or a minister, we the helping professionals need to be aware of this dilemma in engaging our respective tasks for victims of sexual assaults.

In my clinical and pastoral work I provide for victims, it is important that I acknowledge their most sensitive and sacred anatomical part was traumatically assaulted and desecrated by the evil forces of the perpetrators. I also recognize that not only they sustained the horrendous traumatic sufferings but also re-traumatizing medical procedures and prosecutor investigations, as they come to me for healing and post-traumatic growth.

In fact, it is critically important that anything associated to the victims’ strengths are noted not only by the victims themselves but also by others.  Psychologists, ministers, physicians, nurses, social workers, and attorneys, who get involved in the victims’ post-assault life in their respective professional capacities, play important roles in this regard.  As other persons acknowledge the victims’ strengths, it helps them recognize their own resilient strengths to prompt healing and post-traumatic growth. It will also help them overcome and transcend victim mentality, which could haunt them for the rest of their lives.

The victims certainly understand that what is needed to be done medically and legally must be cone as it should .  However, given the inevitable re-traumatizing nature of this post-assault medically and legally required procedures, it makes difference if examining physicians and nurses, as well as interviewing attorneys and social workers, more sensitively acknowledge the victims’ re-traumatization with their procedures, and conduct more empathically.

Medical and legal procedures should not be mere mechanical tasks to be done. The procedural tasks must always sensitively and empathically acknowledge sexually assaulted victims’ traumatization and  re-traumatization.  

In a way, this is similar to how physicians should tell their patients “bad news” – shocking, even possibly traumatizing diagnoses.  In this regard, I always advise physicians and medical students to place themselves in places of their patients and see how they think their patients would like to hear what they rather do not want to hear.  Telling physicians to think how they would want to hear if they were the patients is not enough, because it does not sufficiently acknowledge patients’ unique perspective. Physicians need to go beyond the sphere of their own perspectives in empathically placing themselves in patients’ distressed hearts and minds.

Empathy means to enter into the pathos of patients. The German word, corresponding to empathy in English, is Einfühlung. It literally means to enter (ein) into the feeling (Fühlung), pathos, of the patient. Another way to understand is to become one (ein) contact (Fühlung), indicating solidarity with the patient.  The latter interpretation is more closer to Einfühlung’s similar word, Mitfühlung.  Thus, whether physicians are examining rape victims or telling “bad news” to terminally ill patients – whenever physicians had to perform a task that can shock and (re)traumatize patients – procedures must genuinely embody the very meaning of empathy or Einfühlung.  In other words, treating sexually assaulted victims must be conducted in a way for clinicians are in solidarity with victims in the very traumatize hearts and minds of them.  This is no easy task at all, as we cannot be totally free from the sphere of our own personal perspectives.  But, this is a very important task that we constantly strive for – to serve victims more sensitively and compassionately.

We must go beyond our own professional and personal perspective in dealing with such sensitive clinical issues, whether we are serving rape victims or terminally ill patients.

I always tell physicians, nurses, attorneys, medical students, nursing students, and law students, that being a physician, or a nurse, or an attorney, means being an empathic psychologist first.

Being an empathic psychologist and minister, as well as a physician and attorney, means simply being compassionate fellow human first, reflecting the new command (mandatum novum )of Jesus – love your neighbor (John 13:34) as the Good Samaritan did (Luke 10:25-37). Practice this commandment – not just in our specialized professional capacities, but first and foremost, as a fellow human being reaching out to victims.

We know professionally that the procedures need to be done as soon as possible – though we know that the victims are still in trauma.  We work under the pressure. However, this is only our own professional perspective.  And, we need to go beyond this for the sake of empathy – Einfühlung.

Though there is no simple one-fits-all kind of formulate, we must balance traumatize victims’ perspectives with our professional perspectives under the pressure by placing our own hearts and minds into the victims’, because this is the only way we can become genuinely empathic.

For this, we also need to constantly examine and reflect our own professional perspectives in light of the victims at each case and at each encounter. In order to accomplish this objective, we must first establish rapport with them by providing gentle, genuinely compassionate, secure space and time.  Without this, post-assault medical and legal procedures sure to re-traumatize unnecessarily due to the empathy deficit on our side.

Though the case may be successfully prosecuted at the expenses of the victims’ re-traumatization, I do not think   that justice, in a true sense, is attained this way.  As a pastoral psychologist, I continue to address lingering effects of their initial traumas from sexual assaults but also re-traumatizations brought by the post-assault investigative medical and legal procedures, lacking the aforementioned empathic sensitivity.

In addition to trauma and re-traumalizations, shame and guilt, as well as a sense of powerlessness are important factors to be addressed both psychologically and spiritually, as these factors certainly further complicate victims’ complicated accumulative traumatizations from re-traumatizations from medical and legal procedures.

In order to prevent such psychological complications and their further lingering effects, we really need to take empathy (Einfühlung) more seriously in a way for us to be in solidarity with victims not in our own perspectives but in their shattered hearts and minds.  This is also an absolutely necessary condition to prompt post-traumatic growth.