He borrowed a mirror from the house of a woman for whom he was feeling passionate thoughts which he had yet to reveal, wrote this on the inside and returned it.
ますかがみ心もうつる物ならばさりともいまはあはれとや見む
masukagami kokoro mo uturu mono naraba sari tomo ima Fa aFare to ya mimu
Could this clear glass Reflect my heart, as well, Could it do that, then Well, now how Pitiful would I appear?
The Right state: the Left’s poem has no faults. The Left state: the Right’s poems contains a fault, does it not?
In judgement: What are we to make of the Left’s ‘In a clear glass my ever-changing reflected’ (masukagami utsushikaekemu)? While I have the feeling that there is a source for this poem, this aged official is completely unable to grasp it what it might be. It is not the case that the poem is lacking in an elegant style. The Gentlemen of the Left have commented on the existence of a fault in the Right’s poem. Perhaps the two cranes (tsuru)? This type of issue relating to a poem’s formal diction does not seem that serious to me. However, saying ‘does this so resemble her, that at’ (nite ya kakuran) is insufficient in terms of expression. The Left’s ‘clear glass’ would win, if its source were clear, but in its absence, it is difficult to make it the winner.