# 善人なおもて魂の酬われざる



## Starfrown

I found the following poem:

久遠と罪を連ねて生きよ
其が罪拭わんとせば
善人なおもて魂の酬われざる
いわんや罪人をや

I've only learned the basics of Classical Japanese, so I'm having trouble translating it. Here's what I have so far:

Live eternally linking sin to sin.
If (he) tries to wipe away that sin
A good man***remains***soul/spirit…will not be rewarded/repaid.
Needless to say: how much less for a sinner.

I think the second and fourth lines are correct. I don't know whether "kuon to" should be read as "eternally," but it wouldn't make sense to say "linking sin with eternity," would it? I'm completely lost on the third line.  Any ideas??


----------



## masatom

Hi.
I think the second line to the fourth line is not a classical Japanese poem but from the religious principle of Shin-Buddhism.
In Shin-Buddhism, they thought Buddha (their God) has a strong power to rescue bad people and bring them to Heaven. 
If only a bad man asks Buddha for help, he can go to Heaven. 
"Even a bad man can go to heaven, a good man can go to heaven easily." is ordinary way of thinking, right?
In Shin-Buddhism, they thought reversely.
"Even a good man can go to heaven, a bad man can easily go to heaven."
Do you understand this? This is the most important dogma of Shin-Buddhism. I myself don’t agree with the dogma. They taught people that Buddha wants to care about bad people, not good people. For Buddha, bad people are the main character and good people are side character.
You know?
Buddha just like Christ wants to save *sinful* human being (=all of us).
They advised people to ask Buddha for rescue of the soul.
It is the meaning of the line 2-4.

The problem is the first line.
After hearing Shin-Buddhism’s lesson, some bad people misunderstood it. They thought they could continue doing bad things because Buddha would save him. And they didn’t stop bad things. This was the big problem in Japan at that era.

So I think your poem is created by bad man who misunderstand the doctrine wrongly. 

I wish this might be your help.


So this is mine.

Let's continue doing bad things all of our life.
Asking Buddha for expiating our sins,
Even a good person can go to Heaven.
Needless to say about us.


----------



## Starfrown

Thanks for the detailed explanation, masatom. I have some questions about the constructions used within the poem.

Is "kuon to" used here to mean "eternally"; would you use "kuon ni" instead in Modern Japanese? I think in general that your translation "all one's life" is better, but in the manga(無限の住人) in which I encountered this text, "eternally" seems to fit quite well. I have only seen "kuon" in Buddhist contexts; it seems that "eien" is used everywhere else (of course, kuon may have some meanings that eien doesn't).


善人なおもて魂 ; "naomote" must be much like the English "even."  I would assume that it is made up of "nao" + particle "mo" + particle "te."


My translation of 酬われざる as "will not be rewarded" is not appropriate, though "repaid" is a little bit better; here it must mean "will not face retribution, i.e. will not be revenged upon for his bad deeds."


Am I right?


----------



## Flaminius

Hi *Starfrown*,

Do you have some background information of the text; where you saw it, to whom it is addressed, and so on?  The oft quoted maxim of 親鸞 is this:
善人なおもて往生をとぐ、いわんや悪人をや
Even the good are saved; not to mention the evil.

The third and the fourth lines seem to be saying that no one can be saved.


----------



## Starfrown

I saw it in the manga  無限の住人.  It's about a man who has worms in his body that will repair any wounds that he suffers; he therefore has eternal life.  He is pretty much an unrepentant killer, though a somewhat likeable one.

At first, I felt the same way, Flaminius.  I thought the text was saying that since even a good man won't be rewarded for his efforts, there's no point in trying to be good.  However, the peculiar philosophy of the Shin Buddhists, as detailed by masatom, might make a different reading possible.


----------



## masatom

Hello, friends.
I am sorry but from Flaminius's comment, I've changed my mind.
I think Flaminius is correct.
The 3rd and 4th line is negative sentence. I missed it. I thought it is affirmative sentence. So my interpretation is probably wrong. I thought it was from Shinran.

Now I think this *poem* is pretending to the same style as Shin-Budhism but actually saying exactly the oppsite.

So this is my new one. (adding Flaminius's)

Let's continue doing bad things all of our life.
However often asking Buddha for expiating our sins,
Even the good are never saved,
Not to mention the evil.

Thank you.


----------



## masatom

Starfrown said:


> Thanks for the detailed explanation, masatom. I have some questions about the constructions used within the poem.
> 
> Is "kuon to" used here to mean "eternally"; would you use "kuon ni" instead in Modern Japanese? I think in general that your translation "all one's life" is better, but in the manga(–³ŒÀ‚ÌZl) in which I encountered this text, "eternally" seems to fit quite well. I have only seen "kuon" in Buddhist contexts; it seems that "eien" is used everywhere else (of course, kuon may have some meanings that eien doesn't).
> *I think you are right. I think eternally is better.*
> 
> 
> ‘Pl‚È‚¨‚à‚Ä° ; "naomote" must be much like the English "even." I would assume that it is made up of "nao" + particle "mo" + particle "te."
> *I think you are correct but I don't know how to express Japanese grammar.*
> 
> My translation of V‚í‚ê‚´‚é as "will not be rewarded" is not appropriate, though "repaid" is a little bit better; here it must mean "will not face retribution, i.e. will not be revenged upon for his bad deeds."
> *I think you are right but I don't know the nuance of the English words. *
> 
> 
> Am I right?


 *I think you are right.*

*I appologize that I underestimated your understanding of the poem.*
*I thought you didn't know the meaning of the sentence. *
*Actually you knew the meaning and you wondered how to translate.*
*I wish I delete my reply. I feel so shamed myself.*


----------



## Starfrown

Don't feel bad, masatom.  You just missed the "-zaru" ending in line three.

I didn't completely understand the meaning of the poem when I first posted; I only had a pretty good idea.  I didn't even know what "naomote" meant.

The only question I have left is: Does "kuon *to*" sound odd in modern Japanese?  Would you use "kuon *ni*" instead?


----------



## lammn

Isn't 罪拭わん of the second line equivalent to 罪拭わない, while せば makes it conditional?


----------



## Flaminius

lammn said:


> Isn't 罪拭わん of the second line equivalent to 罪拭わない, while せば makes it conditional?


其が罪拭わんとせば ( < 拭はむとす) does not contain negation.  The _-mutosu_ expresses the volition of the speaker or the subject of the sentence.

久遠と vs. 久遠に
The only grammatical form in Modern Japanese is 久遠に.  I am not aware of the classical usage of 久遠と but I trust the author knows his Latin Classical Japanese well enough.


----------



## Starfrown

The classical “~mu to su” corresponds almost exactly to the modern “(y)ou to suru.” In fact, the modern expression is derived from the classical. (This shift also explains why Modern Japanese verbs are classified as godan instead of yodan.) “mu” was attached to the mizenkei, just as the modern ~nai.

To make it clear:

言う (I) say/ shall say
言わない (I) don’t/won’t say
言わむ (I) _*will*_ say, etc.

At some point, “mu” became simply “u.” I think this was probably a consequence of the fact that classical “mu” often underwent an “onbin” or phonetic change to become the nasal “n,” which is almost vocalic in Japanese (don’t quote me on this, though.).

We therefore end up with the form:

**言わう (Not actually used)

which undergoes an onbin (a+u --> ou) to become:

言おう

The o-vowel in this form represents the 5th vowel row in modern godan verbs.

Note: I haven't bothered with classical Kana usage, which would require "iu" to be written: 言ふ.

I think, Lamm, that you have been confused by a separate nasal onbin. The classical 言わぬ (actually the rentaikei in classical times; shuushikei in later Japanese), which means "I don't/won't speak" could also become 言わん.




Flaminius said:


> 久遠と vs. 久遠に


 
Flam, I still am not sure about the classical usage. My translation works perfectly, but for all I know, the author might be saying "linking sin with eternity." Do you use "to" with "tsuraneru" in Modern Japanese to express the concept of "linking with." 


Of course, I think that if "taru" was used with "kuon" in classical times, that most likely "kuon to" is adverbial here.


----------



## lammn

Thanks for the explanation!
I shall keep my mouth shut for lines containing Classical Japanese.


----------



## Flaminius

Starfrown said:


> Flam, I still am not sure about the classical usage. My translation works perfectly, but for all I know, the author might be saying "linking sin with eternity." Do you use "to" with "tsuraneru" in Modern Japanese to express the concept of "linking with."


The verb つらねる is to link something in a series.  In this context, it is primarily about committing a chain of murders.  To be sure, _-ni_ can introduce the place where the つらねる concatenation takes place, but I am bad at ease with the idea of conceiving "eternity" as the venue of serial killings.

As I have said above, I cannot comment on the classical usage of the adjectival _-to_.  In Modern Japanese, however, _-to_ can only come along with a word that is in itself adverbial.  For example, と in the following sentences are perfectly grammatical:
孜々と罪を連ねる (commit a series of sins diligently)
傲然と罪を連ねる (commit a series of sins arrogantly)
慢然と罪を連ねる (commit a series of sins absent-mindedly)

I now realise my first paragraph virtually forecloses the conjunctive understanding of _-to_.  I wasn't trying to comment on the classical _-to_, though.  It pertains more to the argument structure of つらねる.  I pray ye all understand me.


----------



## Starfrown

Thanks, Flam.



lammn said:


> Thanks for the explanation!
> I shall keep my mouth shut for lines containing Classical Japanese.


 
Please don't hesitate to contribute. We're all learners here.


----------

