Analysis of ‘Spirituality’ in the Japanese-Speaking Mediation Context: Its Contributions and Controversies

Abstract

The present thesis analysed the suitability of the currently applied Japanese translations of the English terms ‘spiritual’ and ‘spirituality’ used by Lois Gold and Mark S. Umbreit in the mediation context. While two Japanese terms, transliterated spirituality and seishin, are applied in the Japanese-speaking mediation context, the use and meaning of those English terms in the context of mediation remain somewhat ill-defined. The suitability of seishin as a translation of spirituality has been questioned, and the meaning of transliterated spirituality, a relatively new word to replace reisei and seishin, remains ambiguous due to its context-bound nature. The revitalisation of reisei is now evident since the beginning of the 2010s in Japan. This study addresses the following three questions. First, the thesis identifies, through a literature review, what the Japanese transliterated term of English spirituality means despite its context-bound nature. Secondly, the study establishes what Gold and Umbreit mean in the context of mediation by textual analysis on their usages of the term spiritual and spirituality. Thirdly, the thesis explores whether mediation in Japan has spiritual dimensions. Depending on the answers to these questions, the research then investigates whether any academic recommendations can be made, for instance, regarding whether reisei is a more suitable Japanese translation for those English terms. The latter two questions involve reviewing relevant literatures, conducting a case study and arguing the notion expressed by those English terms in the Japanese-speaking mediation context. As for the research conclusion, reisei among those three terms appears to be better suited to translate the English term spirituality used by Gold and Umbreit in the context of mediation. This thesis has two main contributions. First, the generated meaning of those English terms should help in understanding Japan’s recent mediation development. Secondly, the findings identify both contributions to and controversies in the Japanese-speaking mediation context resulting from introducing the notion expressed by those English terms.