06 Linguistic Gap Analysis — Ephesians | English → Manipuri

Purpose and Scope

This document executes Step 8 of PRD Phase 1: a linguistic gap analysis identifying where Manipuri (Meiteilon, Bengali script) has (a) no existing vocabulary for a required biblical concept, (b) existing vocabulary that is already occupied by a live religious-tradition meaning that must be fenced off, or (c) existing vocabulary serviceable with qualification. It covers the full span of Ephesians 1–6, with Ephesians 2:1-10 (the core passage) as theological anchor, not scope boundary. Every chapter is reviewed explicitly below, even where a chapter contributes no new lexical gap beyond terms already treated elsewhere.

This analysis governs the term choices later fixed in 08_core_glossary.md and translation_memory.json/bible_term_registry.json. Where this document and those later artifacts differ in wording, the later artifacts (having undergone additional refinement) govern, but no later artifact may contradict a Critical-risk fencing decision made here.

All renderings below either (1) reuse the baseline Romans translation_memory.json exactly, per hard rule, or (2) are new proposals for Ephesians-specific vocabulary, marked NEW, pending confirmation and version-increment into translation memory before Phase 2.

Chapter coverage note: Ephesians 1 (election, predestination, blessing, sealing) — analyzed. Ephesians 2 (salvation by grace, core passage; Jew/Gentile unity) — analyzed. Ephesians 3 (mystery, Paul’s stewardship, prayer) — analyzed. Ephesians 4 (body of Christ, gifts, unity, old/new self) — analyzed. Ephesians 5 (walking in light, household codes begin, marriage as mystery, idolatry) — analyzed. Ephesians 6 (household codes continue, armor of God, closing) — analyzed. No chapter is silently omitted.

---

Part A: Doctrine Vocabulary Matrix

For each of the nine curriculum doctrines: the available Manipuri resources, their weaknesses, and the recommended strategy (Reuse baseline / Coin new descriptive compound / Transliterate / Paraphrase with mandatory teaching note).

Doctrine 1 — Salvation by Grace through Faith (anchor: Eph 2:1-10)

Term	Available Manipuri Resource	Weakness	Recommended Strategy
grace	মথৌ তাদনা পীবা তেংবাং (baseline)	Descriptive compound is doctrinally sound but has no natural one-word competitor; risk is not lexical gap but semantic crowding from কৃপা (bhakti-responsive favor)	Reuse baseline exactly. Mandatory contrastive teaching note at every 2:1-10 occurrence distinguishing from কৃপা.
faith	থাজবা (baseline)	Adequate; risk is crowding from ভক্তি	Reuse baseline exactly.
salvation/saved	অহানবা (baseline)	Adequate; risk is crowding from মোক্ষ and Vaishnava devotional-union hope	Reuse baseline exactly.
dead (spiritually), 2:1,5	No existing Meitei theological term for “spiritually dead” as a condition of the living unbeliever	Gap: existing vocabulary around death/spirit (থাওয়াই, সিবা) is already populated by Sanamahi ancestor-veneration (Apokpa) framing “the dead” as active family presences	Coin descriptive compound থাওয়ায়দা সিবা (“dead in trespasses/spirit”) with mandatory note distinguishing from Apokpa veneration.
wrath, 2:3; 5:6	No settled Christian-Manipuri term; ৱাইফম (fate) and general anger vocabulary both wrong register	Gap: needs to convey personal, judicial displeasure, not impulsive anger or impersonal cosmic consequence	Coin compound তেংবাং মপুগী অহোংবা; explicit note excluding karmic-accrual and ritual-appeasement readings.
redemption, 1:7,14; 4:30	No existing single term; existing ransom/purchase vocabulary is entangled with ritual-offering economies	Gap requiring careful fencing against Umang Lai appeasement offerings and prayaschitta karmic-debt logic	Coin compound মমল পীদুনা হানবা (“released by a price paid”); teach as a completed historical transaction.
works / good works, 2:9-10	থবক (ordinary word for “work/labor”) exists and is unambiguous lexically	Doctrinal risk is not lexical gap but functional whiplash: same word rejected as salvation’s ground (v.9) and affirmed as its fruit (v.10) within two verses	Reuse plain term থবক / অফবা থবক with mandatory translator note on the vv.9-10 reversal, explicitly contrasted with bhakti সেবা.
boast, 2:9	চাউথোকপা exists as ordinary vocabulary	Low lexical risk; high rhetorical-force risk if softened	Reuse plain term, preserve full rhetorical force, no hedging.
mercy, 2:4	চানবা exists as ordinary vocabulary	Crowding risk: ISKCON-influenced literature already glosses Krishna’s কৃপা as “mercy” in English-language material circulating in Manipur, creating a false-friend bridge back into bhakti-responsive favor	Reuse plain term with explicit fencing note; mercy responds to helplessness, not devotion already offered.
forgiveness, 1:7	ময়ামদা কোকপা (a phrase the Romans baseline explicitly rejected as too narrow for “justification”)	Not a gap — the phrase exists and is serviceable — but its baseline history means translators must be told it is correct here though wrong elsewhere	Repurpose deliberately, flagged with a cross-reference note to its baseline rejection context so translators do not conclude it is banned outright.
workmanship/new creation, 2:10	শেমগৎপিবা / শেম্বা (make/create) exist as ordinary vocabulary	No existing theological “new creation” compound; risk is under-marking the divine-agency claim	Coin compound, explicit note: salvation and resulting life are God’s making, not self-improvement or unlocked devotional potential.

Doctrine 2 — Election and Predestination in Christ (Eph 1)

Term	Available Resource	Weakness	Strategy
election/chosen	তেংবাং মপুগী খনবা (baseline)	Adequate	Reuse baseline.
predestined, 1:5,11	No existing term; khanba (choose) root available to extend	Gap, and a doubled fencing problem unique to Ephesians: risk of collapse into (a) ৱাইফম impersonal fate, (b) the historic Meitei royal-lineage predestination claim (descent from Pakhangba), and (c) Vaishnava jyotish astrological determinism — three live cultural analogues, not one	Coin compound মমাংগী মথংদা খনবা (“chosen beforehand”), built on baseline root for continuity; mandatory theologian-reviewed note addressing all three analogues, emphasizing “in love” (1:5) as the personal ground.
inheritance, 1:14,18	চাদান (ordinary inheritance vocabulary, real weight in yumnak clan practice)	Crowding: yumnak birth-lineage inheritance is a strong existing cultural frame that could quietly reduce believer’s inheritance to a kin-based entitlement	Reuse ordinary term with explicit contrast note: this inheritance is not birth-lineage administered by clan elders, but a Spirit-guaranteed future share secured by adoption, not descent.
sealed, 1:13; 4:30	চুম্মৎ পীবা (seal/stamp, ordinary vocabulary)	Crowding: external devotional branding practices (tilaka; in some Gaudiya lineages tapta-mudrankana) are a visible, embodied analogue that could mislead toward an external-badge reading	Coin/repurpose compound with note: the Spirit’s seal is internal, invisible, and given once, not an externally displayed devotional mark.
guarantee/down payment, 1:14	No existing single term; built on পীথোকপা (given/credited) root	Minor gap	Coin compound মমাংগী পীথোকপা for continuity with imputed_righteousness root.
adoption, 1:5	মচা ওইনা লৌবা (baseline)	Adequate, same yumnak-lineage caution as Romans	Reuse baseline.
calling, 1:18; 4:1,4	কৌবগী থৌদাং (baseline)	Adequate	Reuse baseline.
fellow heirs, 3:6	Built on চাদান + লোইনবা	No true gap once inheritance and fellowship are fixed	Coin compound, low incremental risk.

Doctrine 3 — The Church as the Body of Christ (Eph 1, 2, 4, 5)

Term	Available Resource	Weakness	Strategy
church	কলিসিয়া (baseline transliteration)	Adequate; crowding risk only if English “temple” language later reintroduces মন্দির	Reuse baseline; extend forbidden-substitution rule explicitly to all “temple” metaphor language (see holy_temple below).
body of Christ, 1:23; 4:12,16; 5:23,30	No existing term; ক্রিস্তোগী হাকচাং coinable from ordinary হাকচাং (body)	Gap with a serious double-crowding risk unique to this doctrine: (a) a maibi’s body as ritual vessel/medium for spirit-indwelling in Lai Haraoba trance, and (b) a temple murti understood as literally embodying Krishna’s presence	Coin compound with mandatory theologian note on both analogues: Paul’s metaphor is relational/organic (interdependent members), not a claim about a ritual medium or an embodied object of worship.
head (of church/husband), 1:22; 4:15; 5:23	কোক (ordinary word for head)	Low lexical risk, high doctrinal-isolation risk: without its qualifier attached every time, “head” invites unilateral-authority readings from either clan-elder patriarchy or residual royal-household hierarchy	Reuse ordinary term, but require the self-giving-love qualifier (5:25) to travel with every occurrence, enforced as a validation rule, not merely a note.
fullness, 1:10,23; 3:19; 4:13	মপুং ফাবা (root already present in baseline doctrine names)	No gap; continuity opportunity	Reuse/extend root.
holy temple/dwelling place, 2:21-22	No existing distinct term from “church”; English “temple” is the risk vector	Gap requiring explicit extension of baseline’s forbidden-substitution rule (never মন্দির) to this metaphorical usage specifically, since translators encountering English “temple” may reach for the obvious cognate	Coin compound তেংবাং মপুগী অসেংবা লৈফম; treat as Critical-adjacent enforcement item even though risk-tier is High.
cornerstone, 2:20	No existing term; খ্বাইদগী মরুওইবা লু coinable from ordinary building vocabulary	Crowding: sacred foundation stones exist at both Umang Lai groves and Vaishnava temple sites	Coin compound with fencing note.
household of God, 2:19	তেংবাং মপুগী ইমুং, built on ইমুং (household, positive yumnak resonance)	Positive resonance is itself the risk: could be read as merely a warmer clan, not a trans-clan family	Coin compound, note that this transcends any single biological clan.
unity of the Spirit, baptism, gift-offices (4:3-11)	Various, several NEW, one transliteration (বাপ্তিজম)	Minor, mostly non-crowded gaps	Coin/transliterate as listed in 08_core_glossary; low incremental risk once Doctrine 1-3 roots are fixed.

Doctrine 4 — Unity of Jews and Gentiles in One New Humanity (Eph 2, 3)

Term	Available Resource	Weakness	Strategy
gentiles	অতোপ্পা ফুরুপ (baseline)	Adequate; ফুরুপ carries real clan-identity weight	Reuse baseline with awareness note.
dividing wall, 2:14	No existing term; খায়দোকপগী লেপ্পা coinable	Serious contemporary-sensitivity risk: Manipur’s live inter-community ethnic tensions make a careless mapping of “dividing wall” onto present social/political division doctrinally and pastorally dangerous	Coin compound, mandatory theologian note: this resolves a specific historical covenantal (Jew/Gentile) division, not a template for present inter-community conflict resolution.
one new man/new humanity, 2:15	No existing term; shares wording with individual “new self” (4:24)	Genuine lexical collision within the same book: the same Manipuri phrase must carry two distinct referents (corporate vs individual)	Coin single compound অমা অনৌবা মীওই for both, mandatory disambiguating translator note at every occurrence of either sense.
reconciliation, 2:16	Built on ইনগবা (peace, baseline) + ওইহনবা pattern	No true gap once peace/justification/sanctification patterns are fixed	Coin compound, low incremental risk.
access/boldness, 2:18; 3:12	No existing single term; থাজনা চেংশিনবা coinable	Minor gap; positive opportunity to teach unmediated approach against ritual-intermediary models (maibi/maiba, priestly protocol)	Coin single shared compound for both occurrences, explicit note on unmediated access.
circumcision, 2:11	সুন্নত (regional loanword)	Low risk; contextual only	Transliterate/loanword.

Doctrine 5 — The Mystery of Christ Revealed (Eph 1, 3, 5, 6)

Term	Available Resource	Weakness	Strategy
mystery, 1:9; 3:3-9; 5:32; 6:19	No existing neutral term; every candidate Manipuri word for “hidden sacred knowledge” is already occupied	This is the single highest-salience semantic-neighborhood collision in the entire book. Gaudiya Vaishnavism holds a developed category of esoteric/confidential devotional knowledge (rasa-tattva, guhya-tattva) disclosed progressively to advancing bhakti initiates, dramatized through Ras Lila; Sanamahi tradition separately guards ritual/cosmological knowledge as the province of maibi/maiba specialists and the (historically burned, now revival-significant) puya textual tradition. Any term suggesting “esoteric secret for the initiated” collides with both live traditions simultaneously.	Coin compound লুকখিবা থৌরাং (“formerly hidden plan/matter”) with mandatory Critical-tier theologian note at every occurrence: Ephesians’ mystery is fully and publicly disclosed to all believers now, the opposite structure of graded esoteric disclosure.
stewardship, 3:2,9	থৌদাং তানবা, built on থৌদাং (task) root	No true gap	Coin compound.
boldness (shared with access, 3:12)	See Doctrine 4	—	Shared entry.
revelation/wisdom, 1:17; 3:5,10	ফোংদোকপা (baseline prophecy root) / য়াম্না খংবা (unconfirmed naturalness)	য়াম্না খংবা is a provisional coinage pending native-speaker confirmation	Coin provisionally, flag for native-speaker review before Phase 2 lock-in.
incarnation/son of God (background)	মীওইগী মহৈ লৌবা / তেংবাং মপুগী মচানুপা (baseline)	Adequate; underlies “mystery” passages	Reuse baseline exactly, never অবতার.

Doctrine 6 — Spiritual Warfare and the Armor of God (Eph 1, 2, 3, 6)

Term	Available Resource	Weakness	Strategy
principalities and powers, 1:21; 2:2; 3:10; 6:12	No existing neutral term	The single highest-stakes decision in the book. Any term for organized hostile spiritual beings risks conflation with Umang Lai, the benevolent guardian/forest deities of Sanamahi cosmology honored (not warred against) through Lai Haraoba, and with শক্তি (already forbidden in the baseline for God’s own power, given its maibi-trance association). Getting this wrong does not just cause confusion — it risks casting an actively venerated category of local deity as demonic, a serious pastoral and communal-relations hazard.	Coin compound অসোইবা থাওয়াই পাংগলশিং (“evil spirit-powers”), explicitly modified by “evil/hostile” so the term cannot default to a neutral or benevolent spirit-being reading; mandatory Critical-tier theologian review at every occurrence, with pastoral framing guidance (not framed as polemic against Umang Lai veneration as practiced by neighbors, but naming a distinct NT category).
devil/Satan, 2:2; 4:27; 6:11	No native term with the correct scope; existing options collide with different narrative frameworks	Crowding: a generic hostile-spirit term would blur into Umang Lai malevolent-spirit folklore; a demon/asura term (e.g. figures like Kamsa or Putana from Krishna mythology) would import an unrelated narrative frame	Transliterate শয়তান (Shoitan), following established regional Christian convention, precisely because transliteration avoids both collision risks that any native paraphrase would create.
schemes of the devil, 6:11	Built on শয়তান	No true gap once শয়তান is fixed	Coin compound.
heavenly places, 1:3,20; 2:6; 3:10; 6:12	No existing term; স্বর্গগী মফমশিং coinable from ordinary “heaven” vocabulary	Crowding: risk of collapse into Vaikuntha/Goloka (Krishna’s heavenly abode, already flagged under baseline salvation) or the Umang Lai spirit-realm	Coin compound, fencing note against both.
armor of God, 6:11,13	No existing spiritual-metaphor term; genuine Meitei war-vocabulary (লান্/থাং) is available but is not neutral	Crowding: Manipur’s living Thang-Ta martial tradition attaches Sanamahi ritual/cosmological (Pakhangba) significance to swords and spears; borrowing this vocabulary risks reading Paul’s metaphor as endorsing ritual weaponry	Coin compound তেংবাং মপুগী লান্থাং, explicit note: a metaphor for spiritual equipment, not an endorsement of Thang-Ta ritual practice.
word of God (sword of the Spirit), 6:17	তেংবাং মপুগী ৱাহেই	No true gap	Coin compound, paired with থাওয়াই অসেংবা.
ambassador, 6:20	Built on baseline apostle root	No true gap	Coin compound.

Doctrine 7 — Household Codes and Christ-Centered Relationships (Eph 5, 6)

Term	Available Resource	Weakness	Strategy
submission, 5:21,22,24	ইনবা, built on baseline obedience_of_faith root	Crowding: existing unilateral clan-elder/patriarchal yumnak authority patterns, and residual memory of royal-household hierarchy, could quietly override the text’s mutual submission (5:21) as the governing frame	Reuse/extend root, with mandatory note that mutuality (5:21) governs the entire section; not to be taught as one-directional.
head (of the wife), 5:23	কোক (same as Doctrine 3)	See Doctrine 3 head entry; risk compounds when the ecclesial and marital senses appear in close proximity	Reuse, mandatory paired qualifier (Christ’s self-giving love, 5:25) at every occurrence, enforced by validation rule.
honor parents, 6:2	ইকাই খুমনবা (genuine Meitei respect-idiom)	Low risk; strong natural fit	Reuse ordinary idiom.
discipline and instruction, 6:4	তম্বিহনবা অমসুং চেকশিনবা	No true gap	Coin compound, note the reciprocal constraint on fathers.
bondservant/master (human), 6:5-9	মিনাই (servant) / মপু (ordinary word for master, distinct from মপু ইবুংগো)	Crowding risk is severe but narrow: মপু is the plain word for a human master, but if the honorific ইবুংগো were ever attached it would collide directly with the Critical baseline term for Christ’s Lordship	Reuse ordinary term, with an absolute validation rule: ইবুংগো must never accompany মপু in a human-master context.
no partiality, 6:9	Reuses baseline universal_human_accountability root	No true gap	Reuse baseline root, applied to household-status distinctions.

Doctrine 8 — Gifts for Building Up the Church (Eph 4)

Term	Available Resource	Weakness	Strategy
apostle, prophet, teacher	তবিদগী থাবিরকপা, তোঙান তোঙানবা ফোংদোকপা (baseline); তম্বিহনবা মীওই (NEW)	Prophet already fenced against মৈবা/মৈবী in baseline; apostle/teacher present low incremental risk	Reuse baseline for apostle/prophet; coin teacher term.
evangelist, pastor	নুংঙাইবগী পাউ সন্দোকপা মীওই / য়াওশিংবু য়েংবা মীওই (both NEW)	Pastor term unconfirmed for naturalness	Coin, flag pastor term for native-speaker review.
equip, 4:12	মপুং ফাহন্নবা, built on fullness root	No true gap	Coin compound.
spiritual gifts, 4:7-11	থাওয়াইগী খুদোল (baseline)	Adequate; fenced against শক্তি (maibi trance-power)	Reuse baseline exactly.

Doctrine 9 — Walking in Newness of Life (Eph 2, 4, 5, 6)

Term	Available Resource	Weakness	Strategy
walk, 2:2,10; 4:1,17; 5:2,8,15	চৎনবা, sharing a root with baseline righteousness compound (অচুম্বা চৎনবিরাক)	No true gap; continuity opportunity underused if not flagged	Reuse/extend root, teach continuity explicitly.
old self / new self, 4:22,24	মমাংগী মীওই / অনৌবা মীওী	Direct collision with the corporate “one new man” of 2:15, which shares the same phrase for “new”	Coin, mandatory disambiguating note distinguishing corporate (2:15) from individual (4:24) sense — same fencing problem flagged under Doctrine 4, cross-referenced here.
children of light/darkness, 5:8	ৱাংবগী মচাশিং / অমাংবগী মচাশিং	Crowding: puya-tradition cosmogonic light/darkness narratives exist as a separate frame	Coin compound, note this is ethical-relational, not cosmogonic.
sexual immorality/impurity, 5:3	ব্যভিচার (loanword) / শেংদবা (coined to avoid a specific collision)	Impurity term risks near-homophonic collision with অসেংবা (holy) if built carelessly on the শেং- root with an অ- prefix	Transliterate/loanword for immorality; coin distinct compound শেংদবা for impurity, explicitly avoiding the অ-শেংবা pattern.
idolatry, 5:5	মুর্তি খুরুম্বা	Highest pastoral-sensitivity term in the whole curriculum: names, in ordinary register, practices central to living Manipuri Vaishnava temple devotion (murti veneration) and, separately, Sanamahi household/grove-shrine practice	Reuse ordinary descriptive term (no viable neutral alternative exists), but mandatory Critical-tier note: teach strictly within Ephesians’ own argument (covetousness equated with idolatry, 5:3-5), never as polemic against neighbors’ or family members’ living devotional practice.
put off/put on, 4:22,24; 6:11	থাদোকপা / সেৎপা	Naturalness unconfirmed	Coin, flag for native-speaker review.
grieve the Holy Spirit / filled with the Spirit, 4:30; 5:18	Combinations built on থাওয়াই অসেংবা (baseline Critical term)	No true gap; enforcement risk only	Coin combination, absolute rule: থাওয়াই অসেংবা must appear in full, never bare থাওয়াই, in either combination.

---

Part B: Missing Vocabulary vs. Crowded Semantic Neighborhoods

Ephesians’ gap profile differs meaningfully from the Romans baseline: Romans’ hardest problems were mostly crowded neighborhoods (grace vs. কৃপা, salvation vs. মোক্ষ, incarnation vs. অবতার — established categories with a wrong-but-tempting native word already sitting nearby). Ephesians adds several genuine missing-vocabulary gaps — concepts with no existing Manipuri lexical candidate at all, requiring fresh coinage rather than fencing an existing word — alongside its own new crowded neighborhoods.

B.1 Genuine Missing-Vocabulary Gaps (coinage required, low collision risk)

These have no existing Manipuri word occupying the space; the translation task is descriptive-compound construction, not doctrinal fencing:

• Redemption (মমল পীদুনা হানবা) — no existing “price-paid release” compound.
• Sealed / guarantee (চুম্মৎ পীবা / মমাংগী পীথোকপা) — no existing “Spirit’s pledge” vocabulary.
• Fellow heirs / household of God / fellow citizens / cornerstone — all require compound construction from existing building-blocks (চাদান, ইমুং, লৈপাক, লু) with no prior theological usage.
• Dividing wall / one new humanity / reconciliation — Ephesians’ unity-of-Jew-and-Gentile argument has no ready-made Manipuri equivalent structure at all; every term here is fresh coinage.
• Stewardship, boldness/access, wisdom (য়াম্না খংবা) — administrative/relational vocabulary requiring compound construction; wisdom specifically flagged for native-speaker naturalness confirmation.
• Armor of God / schemes of the devil / word of God (as sword) — the metaphor set itself is new to Manipuri Christian usage in a book-length way (Romans has no armor imagery); requires full compound-set construction.
• Old self / new self, renewed, put off/put on, children of light — the “clothing” and “renewal” metaphor family is a coinage set, not a fencing set.

B.2 Crowded Semantic Neighborhoods (fencing required; existing word or a tempting near-neighbor already present)

These require active defense against a real, live alternative meaning, not merely invention:

Concept	Occupying Neighbor	Tradition	Severity
Mystery (1:9; 3:3-9; 5:32; 6:19)	Graded esoteric devotional knowledge (rasa-tattva/guhya-tattva); guarded ritual/cosmological knowledge (maibi/maiba, puya)	Both Vaishnavism and Sanamahism simultaneously	Critical — highest severity in the book
Principalities and powers (1:21; 2:2; 3:10; 6:12)	Umang Lai (benevolent guardian deities); শক্তি (maibi trance-power)	Sanamahism	Critical — highest pastoral-relations stakes
Idolatry (5:5)	Murti veneration; household/grove-shrine practice	Both traditions, as living daily practice	Critical — highest pastoral-sensitivity
Redemption (1:7,14; 4:30)	Ritual ransom/appeasement offerings; prayaschitta karmic-debt logic	Sanamahism / regional Hindu practice	High
Body of Christ (1:23; 4:12,16; 5:23,30)	Maibi’s body as trance-vessel; murti as embodied divine presence	Both traditions	High
Sealed (1:13; 4:30)	Tilaka / tapta-mudrankana devotional branding	Vaishnavism	High
Predestined (1:5,11)	ৱাইফম fate; Pakhangba royal-lineage descent; Vaishnava jyotish astrology	Sanamahism (two distinct sub-analogues) + regional Hindu astrology	Critical
Wrath (2:3; 5:6)	Impersonal karmic consequence; appeasable household/Umang Lai spirit displeasure	Both traditions	High
Heavenly places (1:3,20; 2:6; 3:10; 6:12)	Umang Lai spirit-realm; Vaikuntha/Goloka	Both traditions	Medium
Armor of God (6:11,13)	Thang-Ta ritual weaponry (Pakhangba-linked cosmological significance)	Sanamahism	High
Dividing wall (2:14)	Manipur’s contemporary inter-community ethnic tension (a social, not theological, near-neighbor)	Contemporary Manipur social context, not a religious tradition	High — distinct risk type: anachronistic political mapping, not syncretism
Devil / Satan (2:2; 4:27; 6:11)	Umang Lai malevolent-spirit folklore; Krishna-mythology asura/demon figures	Both traditions	Critical
Head, kephalē (1:22; 4:15; 5:23)	Unilateral clan-elder / patriarchal yumnak authority; residual royal-household hierarchy	Meitei social structure (not a religious tradition per se)	High
Impurity (5:3)	Near-homophonic collision with অসেংবা (holy) if built on the same root with a naive prefix	Internal Manipuri phonology risk, not a competing tradition	High (self-inflicted risk, avoidable by construction choice already made)

Note the structural pattern: Ephesians concentrates its most severe crowding risks (mystery, principalities and powers, idolatry, devil, predestined, wrath) precisely at the doctrines most central to this curriculum’s own thesis (grace/salvation, election, the mystery revealed, spiritual warfare) — meaning the highest doctrinal load-bearing terms and the highest syncretism risk overlap almost completely in this book, more so than in Romans.

---

Part C: Transliteration vs. Paraphrase Decisions

Term	Decision	Rationale
শয়তান (devil/Satan)	Transliterate	Any native paraphrase collides with either Umang Lai malevolent-spirit folklore or Krishna-mythology demon figures; transliteration, following established regional Christian convention, sidesteps both by introducing a marked, foreign-sourced proper name.
বাপ্তিজম (baptism)	Transliterate	Consistent with regional Christian usage; no native ritual-washing term is close enough to be tempting or risky, so transliteration is simply the established convention, not a defensive move.
ক্রিস্তো, জিসু, ইস্রায়েল, দাউদ (Christ, Jesus, Israel, David)	Transliterate (reused from baseline)	Established Manipuri Bible-translation convention; no change for Ephesians.
সুন্নত (circumcision)	Transliterate (regional loanword)	Low-risk contextual term; existing loanword is adequate and unambiguous.
ব্যভিচার (sexual immorality)	Transliterate/loanword	Established Bengali/Indic Christian usage; low collision risk.
মমল পীদুনা হানবা (redemption)	Paraphrase (coined compound), not transliteration	No transliterable Greek/Hebrew root has entered regional Christian usage for this concept the way “baptisma” has; a descriptive compound is required and is teachable.
লুকখিবা থৌরাং (mystery)	Paraphrase (coined compound), not transliteration	Transliterating “mysterion”-derived vocabulary is not attested in Manipuri Christian usage and would land as an opaque loanword conveying nothing; the doctrinal content (formerly hidden, now openly revealed) must be carried by the compound itself, not deferred to a footnote.
অসোইবা থাওয়াই পাংগলশিং (principalities and powers)	Paraphrase (coined compound), not transliteration	A transliterated Greek term would be doctrinally inert to a first-time hearer; the “evil/hostile” qualifier must be present in the rendering itself, not just in a note, given the severity of the Umang Lai collision risk.
মুর্তি খুরুম্বা (idolatry)	Paraphrase using existing ordinary vocabulary, not transliteration or invented euphemism	No neutral alternative exists in Manipuri; euphemistic invention would only obscure the term’s real-world referent and weaken the pastoral teaching moment Ephesians itself creates (covetousness = idolatry). Ordinary, direct vocabulary is preferred specifically so it can be taught carefully rather than hidden.
তেংবাং মপুগী লান্থাং (armor of God)	Paraphrase, deliberately avoiding Thang-Ta-specific weapon vocabulary	Using generic লান্/থাং (war/weapon) roots without invoking the specific ritual martial-arts tradition allows the metaphor to land without endorsing or appearing to reference Thang-Ta’s Pakhangba-linked ritual significance.
মপু (human master, 6:5-9) vs. মপু ইবুংগো (divine Lord)	Reuse plain existing word for the human sense; never transliterate or extend the honorific	The baseline’s ইবুংগো honorific is reserved by hard rule for Christ; the household-code use of κύριος for a human master must use the plain, unmarked term, making transliteration unnecessary and honorific-extension forbidden.

General principle applied throughout: transliterate proper names and already-conventionalized loanwords (persons, ordinances); paraphrase/coin descriptive compounds for theological concepts, especially where a transliterated Greek/Hebrew term would be doctrinally opaque to a first-generation reader — consistent with the baseline’s own established pattern (e.g. গস্পেল itself is a paraphrase, নুংঙাইবগী পাউ, not a transliteration of “euangelion”).

---

Part D: Ranked List of Ephesians’ Highest-Risk Ambiguities

Ranked by combined severity (doctrinal centrality × collision probability × pastoral/communal-relations stakes):

1. Mystery (μυστήριον), 1:9; 3:3-9; 5:32; 6:19 — Simultaneous double collision with Vaishnavism’s graded esoteric devotional knowledge and Sanamahism’s guarded ritual/cosmological knowledge. This is the book’s own central theological term (the “mystery of Christ”) and the single highest-severity ambiguity, because getting the structure of disclosure wrong (graded/esoteric vs. fully/publicly revealed) undermines the doctrine even if the target-language word is otherwise fine.

2. Principalities and Powers, 1:21; 2:2; 3:10; 6:12 — Direct collision with Umang Lai (a benevolent, actively venerated deity-class) and with শক্তi (maibi trance-power, already forbidden elsewhere). Uniquely high communal-relations risk: mistranslation here does not just confuse doctrine, it risks implicitly denouncing a neighbor’s or family member’s currently practiced household/grove devotion as demonic.

3. Idolatry, 5:5 — Highest pastoral-sensitivity term in the curriculum; no viable neutral rendering exists, so the risk cannot be engineered away lexically and must be managed entirely through teaching framing (Ephesians’ own covetousness argument, not external polemic).

4. Predestined, 1:5,11 — Triple analogue collision (fate/ৱাইফম, Pakhangba royal-lineage descent, Vaishnava jyotish astrology) is unusually dense for a single term; requires the “in love” (1:5) qualifier to be structurally inseparable from the term in all teaching material.

5. Devil/Satan, 2:2; 4:27; 6:11 — Requires transliteration specifically because both native alternatives (Umang Lai malevolent-spirit folklore; Krishna-mythology asura/demon figures) import wrong narrative frameworks; the risk is mitigated by lexical choice but must still be actively taught, not assumed self-evident.

6. Body of Christ / Head, 1:22-23; 4:15-16; 5:23,30 — Double risk: (a) body-metaphor collision with maibi trance-vessel and murti-embodiment concepts; (b) head-metaphor collision with unilateral clan/patriarchal authority patterns if the self-giving-love qualifier is ever detached from the term, which given the metaphor’s recurrence across three chapters is a real drafting risk.

7. Redemption, 1:7,14; 4:30 — Collision with ritual ransom/appeasement economies (Umang Lai offerings; prayaschitta karmic-debt logic); mitigated by framing as a single completed historical transaction rather than an ongoing ritual relationship.

8. One New Humanity / New Self, 2:15 vs. 4:22,24 — A self-inflicted internal ambiguity (not a cross-tradition collision): the same Manipuri phrase must carry both a corporate and an individual sense within the same short letter, requiring a mandatory disambiguating note wherever either occurs — the risk is confusion between two orthodox meanings, not syncretism, but the consequences (readers conflating corporate reconciliation with individual moral renewal) are still doctrinally significant.

9. Wrath, 2:3; 5:6 — Collision with impersonal karmic-consequence framing and with an appeasable-spirit model; mitigated by insisting on personal, judicial displeasure resolved only by grace, never ritual.

10. Works / Boast, 2:9-10 — Internal whiplash risk (same root word, opposite theological function within two verses) compounded by the live bhakti সেবা (devotional service) framework, which supplies a ready wrong lens for reading “good works” back into salvation’s ground rather than its fruit.

11. Sealed, 1:13; 4:30 — Collision with visible devotional branding/marking practices (tilaka, tapta-mudrankana); mitigated by stressing the internal, invisible, once-given nature of the Spirit’s seal.

12. Armor of God, 6:11,13 — Collision with Manipur’s living Thang-Ta martial tradition and its Pakhangba-linked ritual significance; mitigated by generic (not Thang-Ta-specific) weapon vocabulary and explicit metaphor-not-endorsement framing.

13. Dividing Wall, 2:14 — A distinct risk type: not syncretism with a religious tradition but anachronistic mapping onto Manipur’s contemporary inter-community ethnic tensions; requires explicit historical-covenantal scoping rather than doctrinal fencing per se.

14. Impurity vs. Holy (phonological), 5:3 — The only entry on this list that is a self-inflicted construction risk rather than a cross-tradition collision; already mitigated in the proposed coinage (শেংদবা, avoiding the অ-শেংবা pattern), but flagged here because a careless future editor could “correct” it back into the collision.

15. Grace vs. Bhakti-Responsive Favor (কৃপা), throughout, esp. 2:5,7-8 — Carried over from the Romans baseline at Critical tier; ranked lower here only because it is an already-solved, well-documented risk rather than a newly discovered one for this curriculum, not because its severity has decreased.

---

Summary and Handoff

This gap analysis identifies markedly more genuine missing-vocabulary work in Ephesians than the Romans baseline required (Part B.1) — reflecting Ephesians’ distinctive vocabulary of adoption/inheritance, cosmic powers, armor, and household relationship — while also surfacing several new, high-severity crowded neighborhoods not present in Romans at all (mystery, principalities and powers, idolatry, predestined’s triple analogue). All recommended strategies in Part A are carried forward into 08_core_glossary.md and must be reflected in the updated translation_memory.json/bible_term_registry.json before Phase 2 translation begins, per the Pre-flight Checklist in 12_ai_translation_requirements.md. No recommendation here contradicts any baseline Romans entry; where Ephesians repurposes a baseline-rejected phrase (forgiveness) or extends a baseline root (predestined, reconciliation, redemption), this is noted explicitly to prevent confusion during Phase 2 term-consistency checks.