KKS 74

Previous poem | Next poem

Text

僧正遍昭によみて送りける

Composed and sent to Bishop Henjō

惟喬親王

Prince Koretaka

桜花散らば散らなん散らずとて故郷人のきても見なくに

sakurabana chira-ba chira-nan chira-zu to te furusato hito no ki-te mo mi-naku ni

Cherry blossoms If you will fall then fall. If you do not fall The old companion of mine Will still not come to see.

Notes

old companion

The exact meaning of furusato hito is uncertain. Everyone agrees it refers to Henjō, but why this term in particular is used depends on the overall interpretation of the poem. Scholars have variously placed Koretaka at Urin'in Temple or the Onomiya (where he lived after taking holy orders). Regardless, the interpretation that almost everyone takes is that the furusato is the capital, and it refers to when Koretaka and Henjō were friends before Koretaka took holy orders. Katagiri rejects this idea, noting that Kyoto (Heian) is typically not referred to in this way -- instead Katagiri explains that Henjō and Koretaka both used to live in the place where Koretaka currently is (wherever that might be).

Other sources:

• Shinsen waka | Kokin waka rokujō
• Korai futeishō | Teika hachidaishō

Analysis

The previous poem lamented the falling of the flowers, while this poem takes a resigned attitude towards their inevitable scattering.

Fujiwara no Shunzei (Korai futeishō) made a cryptic comment about the poem, questioning the sugata (expression) of the poem. Keichū (Yozaishō) felt that since Shunzei selected this as a good poem the comment must be a compliment, and his reading was "How could the Prince have come up with such a good poem in this early age of poetry?" Other scholars have read Shunzei as questioning the appropriateness of the bitter or accusatory tone of the poem.

The latter comment depends on how the poem is read. It does seem to express a certain level of bitterness, and the repetition of chiru (fall/scatter) three times emphasizes this feeling. That being said, it is possible that the bitterness is simply a poetic device and that the poem is really just inviting Henjō to see the blossoms. This is the interpretation of Keichū and Takeoka.

Tō no Tsuneyori (Ryōdō kikigaki)'s interpretation was that Henjō was the only person that could truly understand the blossoms, and so if he was not coming, there was no purpose. He does not specify whether the prince is truly upset with Henjō or not, but the idea that it actually shows anger towards Henjō for not visiting (Norinaga, Kaneko) or that it shows deep bitterness and resignation (Shinshaku, Takeoka) seems to be the dominant view.

The anger and bitterness is sometimes also connected to a supposed succession dispute that has already been mentioned in the commentary to KKS 53. In this telling, Koretaka was the first son of Emperor Montoku, but there was an intense succession dispute and due to the political machinations of Fujiwara no Yoshifusa, the 4th son was made Crown Prince instead. Koretaka became a monk in response. Thus this poem may express his lingering regret. However, Katagiri notes that Koretaka didn't become a monk until 22 years after the future Emperor Seiwa was made Crown Prince, and Koretaka's political backing was far too slight for there to be any real dispute in the succession. He considers the dispute story to be a later legendary treatment, made famous through its appearance in works such as the Tales of Heike.

Man'yōshū 2308 is similar in feeling:

来て見べき人もあらなくに我家なる梅の初花散りぬともよし

There is nobody who will come and see it, so it's fine that the first plum flowers in the garden of my house have scattered.

Previous poem | Next poem