**"Hamlet: A Complex and Intriguing Tragedy"**

  
The problem with Hamlet is not that he thinks too much, the problem is that he thinks too well and through thinking he arrives at the truth and the only thing that can be done about the truth is to die
Friedrich Nietzsche

I don't think I can ever forget the experience of reading Hamlet. As much as I try to enjoy literature without getting too immersed, Hamlet pulled me into a strange whirlpool. Harold Bloom says that Hamlet is a mirror in which everyone can see a part of themselves, but in the end, Hamlet is like no one. I saw myself in Hamlet, aware of death. A Hamlet who is constantly grappling with the question and concept of death. A Hamlet whose words are like a poison that he has poured into his father's ear. And when I came to myself, I was poisoned too. This review is the result of summarizing the articles I read about this play.


What is Hamlet about?
For centuries, the question has been what this play is exactly about. The play, like its main character, is elusive to define. Who is the main character? A prince? A son? A stepbrother? A lover? A poet? A swordsman? A philosophy student? A theater critic? A suicidal person on the verge of a cliff? Always and none of the above.


Hamlet can't even be defined by his age. When the play starts, Hamlet has returned from the university and the age of university studies at that time was about nineteen years old. But in the last act, when Hamlet is standing on top of the grave, he refers to himself as thirty. That is, in a story that takes place in at most six weeks, he has become about eleven years older. This play by Shakespeare with age is deliberate and to show Hamlet's maturity. But it makes Hamlet not even fixed in the form of age and years in our imagination.



What was Hamlet's problem?
Was he, as it is said, overly sensitive? Or did he think instead of acting? Or was he too shaken by the death of his father and the marriage of his mother? Or, as Freud said, could Hamlet not take revenge on Claudius because he had realized the Oedipus fantasy of Hamlet? What we know is that Hamlet's problem is the problem of a young man. Struggling with problems that he did not cause and that have been imposed on him by the environment. Unlike Macbeth and King Lear, who are facing midlife and old age problems.


Shakespeare and Hamlet
Hamlet, the longest play by Shakespeare, is intertwined with his personal life. Shakespeare's son, Hamnet, died at the age of eleven three years before this play. In Shakespeare's time, the English language was not yet standardized and these two names were practically the same. Although the main idea of Hamlet is much older than Shakespeare's 1600 version. The origin of the first text of this story dates back to 1200 and in the 1580s a version of it that is lost was performed on stage. But Shakespeare's Hamlet is the mature version of this old story and many thinkers believe that it was influenced by the death of his son and father (during the revision of the play's text).


Other Characters
1. The Ghost of King Hamlet
In the Protestant society in which Shakespeare lived, the return of Hamlet's father's ghost was a problem-causing factor. According to the Catholic Christian view in the 16th century, the souls returned from purgatory to have demands from the living. But the Protestant school believed that the souls were satanic and intended to lead people to destruction with them. The ghost of Hamlet's father introduces himself in the Catholic way and Hamlet considers the possibility of his being satanic in the Protestant way. In this play that is full of ambiguities, is Shakespeare also playing with the use of both ways of thinking here?


Apart from this, the ghost of King Hamlet returns to the material world to control Hamlet and give him orders. The grip of the previous generation on the next generation is judged in the place of this play.


2. The Women in the Play
The women in the play of Hamlet are in a strange silence. Gertrude's words are short and about others. Ophelia only starts to speak after going mad. These two women introspect so little during the play that we don't even know what feelings they have about their situations? Did Gertrude really believe Hamlet's words about the killing of the former king? What was Ophelia's feeling when she was prevented from talking to Hamlet?


Gertrude seems to be a thoughtless woman on the surface but in fact each of her words is rational and calculated. She understands Hamlet's problem and the reason for his restlessness from the very beginning, she doesn't pretend to be ignorant and even tries to help her son. She is also the only person who shows love and attention to Ophelia during her life.


One of Hamlet's biggest mental struggles is his mother's quick marriage to Claudius, which is actually considered adultery. Hamlet can't get rid of his thoughts and constantly imagines his mother in bed with Claudius. A woman who seems not to be and cannot be sexually active and for this reason is also not fixed in Hamlet's mental equations. In the analysis of this mental impulse, if we pass through the Oedipus complex, one theory is that Hamlet doesn't know when this relationship started and maybe he himself is the child of this relationship?


Ophelia, however, is a sample of a woman who has fallen into the patriarchal system. All the time she is present on stage until before she goes mad, she is controlled and humiliated. At first, her father orders her to cut off her relationship with Hamlet and then in the scene of fasting (or the brothel), Hamlet humiliates her and attributes all his bad thoughts about women to her. Ophelia only speaks when she is mad and even then with very complicated and mysterious words. The view of others towards her madness is nothing but pity and humiliation. This is while Hamlet, when he is mad, says whatever he wants clearly and looks at her madness with fear and anxiety. Even in death, Ophelia doesn't take action and chooses death, but Hamlet chooses death himself.


Conclusion
But for me, Hamlet is the tragedy of accepting death. Accepting the anxiety of disappearance and non-being. Accepting the worm that eats away at the inside of human existence. For me, Hamlet is those moments when he raises the skull of Yorick and talks about death. The place where finally Hamlet sees death and as a human, a sinful one, bows down to it in respect.


You can download the main text of the play, its easier version and its audio versions from here
Maede's Books
I will also upload all other sources to the channel

1403/8/17

Well, I think for reading the third play of my life, there was a lot of heavy text. I still have to choose among the current plays. :((

P.S.1: The third part of "Greate british theatre"

The play "Hamlet" with the charming Benedict Cumberbatch (in England, they are jealous of Benedict Cumberbatch)

P.S.2: What's wrong with my server that my God has been translated instead of it?!

It seems that the author is facing some difficulties in choosing a play to read. They have a lot of text to go through and are still undecided. The mention of "Greate british theatre" and the specific play "Hamlet" with Benedict Cumberbatch might suggest an interest in English theatre. However, the frustration with the server and the unexpected translation of "my God" adds a touch of humor or annoyance to the situation. Overall, it gives a sense of the author's thought process and the various elements that are influencing their decision.

“All that is amiable and excellent in nature is combined in Hamlet, with the exception of one quality. He is a man living in meditation, called upon to act by every motive human and divine, but the great object of his life is defeated by continually resolving to do, yet doing nothing but resolve.”
Lecture XII, STC.

As much as I admire Coleridge and with the boldness of having read Hamlet only once and therefore being aware I haven’t even managed to scratch the surface of the Paragon of Tragedies, I dare to antagonize the poet and proclaim that I resist the idea of linking Hamlet’s moral idealism to reprehensible inaction.

The Prince of Denmark’s obsession is to think, not to act. Despite being dethroned by his duplicitous uncle, he seems to have the favor of the common people. However, Hamlet can’t escape the sickness of life and retreats into the abyss of his inwardness. He is plagued by endless questions that paralyze him in meditation: “What a piece of work is a man!... And yet to me what is this quintessence of dust?”.

In the opening scene of Act I, a melancholic dejection has already seized The Prince. Whether for self-preservation or out of fear of foul reality, he engages in deluded gibberish, easily mistaken for a man who has lost his reason.

And yet, his inquisitive soliloquies are filled with the elucidating sharpness of a genius. He taunts with puns and riddles that contain receding depths and layers of meaning.

“The widow being oppressed, the orphan wronged,
The taste of hunger, or a tyrant’s reign,
And thousand more calamities besides,
To grunt and sweat under this weary life,
When that he may his full quietus make,
With a bare bodkin, who would this endure,
But for a hope of something after death?”

Is he a spontaneous philosopher or irredeemably insane?

The world of Hamlet is phantasmagorical, constantly disrupted by the burdens of the past, the betrayals of the present, and the falsehood of the future. Everyone around him seems to have hidden agendas. He observes, ponders, and pretends not to see the King’s debasing lust and murderous greed, Polonius’ machiavellian maneuvers, the Queen’s disgusting shallowness, and Ophelia’s gullible innocence. Yet, his keen eyes discern it all…but at what cost?

“Great wit to madness nearly is allied\\"

The afflictions of life demand greatness of spirit, and Hamlet faces his fate fully aware that logic, reason, and justice are insufficient to untangle the quandaries of existence. In the course of the action, a transformation occurs in him. The doubtful Prince has grown in wisdom and is ready to submit to providence without repudiating the world. The welfare of the Kingdom, the sense of honor, the corroding lust or ambition, all fade away in the spectacle of witnessing the spirit of man blooming and emerging victorious…in defeat.

Engrossing, witty at times and intelligent. This description truly captures the essence of this remarkable work. I have found myself rereading it many times, and I know for sure that I will do so again in the future.

It has firmly established itself as my absolute favourite among all of Shakespeare's plays.

The profound statement, 'There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so,' is just one of the many gems within this masterpiece. It makes us stop and reflect on how our perception and thoughts shape our understanding of the world around us. Shakespeare's ability to convey such deep and meaningful ideas through his words is truly astonishing. This play not only entertains but also challenges our minds and makes us think about life in a whole new light.

It is a work that will continue to be cherished and studied for generations to come.

“Thus conscience does make cowards of us all.”

This is the line that Hamlet utters at the end of his famous soliloquy “To be or not to be”; when he thinks about suicide and when the awareness of the possible afterlife casts doubt on people's minds regarding suicide, it leads him to the conclusion that “resolution is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought.”
And these very lines are the key to understanding the whole play and to recognizing the personality of Hamlet, a man who knows a lot, thinks a lot, takes many aspects of things into account, and for this very reason always postpones action until a point where “even the name of action is lost,” until a point where his revenge is no longer like revenge but rather more like an uncontrollable disaster.

Although Shakespeare is long gone, he repeatedly shows us that Hamlet is an educated, bookish, and thoughtful person: when he is talking to Ophelia, we see him with a book in his hand; when he is talking to Polonius, we again see him with a book in his hand. After meeting with the ghost of his father, he says: “From the table of my memory I'll wipe away all trivial fond records... And thy commandment all alone shall live within the book and volume of my brain.” And finally, the fact that Hamlet was a student at the University of Wittenberg (probably a philosophy student, considering the many references he makes to philosophy), although he came to Elsinore a little after his father's death, and his uncle prevents him from returning to the university.

Hamlet is the representative of awareness and knowledge, that very awareness and knowledge that, according to his own words, “makes cowards of us all.” And this “cowardly” nature is also his essential characteristic. He often laments that he is unable to take revenge on his uncle. After witnessing the passionate performance of an actor, he describes himself as a cowardly pigeon that, like chickens and ostriches, is only capable of pecking at the ground and the sky without having the courage to take action. Elsewhere, he compares himself to the Norwegian soldiers of Fortinbras who, for no reason, for the sake of conquering a worthless piece of land, have risked their lives, but he, with the greatest incentives, is not ready to act. Not only because of fear, but also because of overthinking, overplanning. He is constantly waiting for the ideal moment and misses suitable opportunities one by one.

All of this is because, contrary to what is commonly known, awareness and will, knowledge and ability, have an inverse relationship with each other. There is something of madness in every action because as long as there is thought, there is no action, and the person who wants to act must put aside doubt and uncertainty. Just as Hamlet also says:
“Thus conscience does make cowards of us all.”

Goodreads has reliably informed me that I first delved into the world of Hamlet a decade ago, back in 2012. At that time, I'm not entirely certain what was going through my mind.

I highly doubt that I grasped much of its profound essence, yet somehow I seemed to have taken a liking to it. I even bestowed upon it a rating of 4 stars. However, that's a bit of a fib.

I do recall some of my thoughts then, and a great deal of it was confusion. Fast forward 10 years, and I've acquired that naive confidence which makes me believe I understand a whole lot more.

But I have a feeling that I'll look back on this moment and have a good laugh, hopefully sooner rather than in another 10 years.

This time around, it's a solid 5. Hamlet is undoubtedly my favorite Shakespeare character that I've either read about or watched on stage.

I'm not sure if I've ever fully aligned with his nihilistic sentiments, but boy, are they a joy to read.

A particularly powerful scene that remains etched in my mind is the prince's musings at the grave of Yorick.

I can only assume that the intense squeezing of the heart that I felt upon reading this scene will grow in both pain and magnitude as the years pass by.

When Hamlet sees the skull dug up by the gravedigger and inquires about its identity (ha!), he discovers that it belonged to Yorick.

He knew Yorick. The memories that are dredged up are so familiar to all of us.

We've all forgotten someone who, at a certain moment in our lives, meant the world to us.

It's truly an adaptive function of the mind to allow us to forget these reminiscences, otherwise, our days would be spent in a miserable and melancholy fog.

"Alas, poor Yorick!" exclaims Hamlet, "I knew him, Horatio; a fellow of infinite jest, of most excellent fancy; he hath borne me on his back a thousand times."

And here is a portrayal of this moment, a work by Philip H. Calderon which I recently discovered called The Young Lord Hamlet.

The renewal of this beautiful relationship with this play has been truly wonderful. I'm hoping to catch it in a theatre this summer.

**"To be or not to be: The Enigmatic World of Hamlet"**

The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark is a masterpiece that has captivated audiences for centuries. It is Shakespeare's longest and most ambitious play, filled with a rich tapestry of characters, complex themes, and powerful language.

The famous line "To be or not to be that is the question" is just one of the many profound quotes from the play. Hamlet's soliloquies are a window into his tortured soul, as he grapples with the meaning of life, death, and everything in between. His philosophical musings, such as "For there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so," show his open-mindedness and scepticism.

The play is not only a study of human nature but also a commentary on the political and social issues of Shakespeare's time. The story of Hamlet's revenge against his uncle Claudius, who has murdered his father and married his mother, is set against the backdrop of a feud between Denmark and Norway. The play explores themes of loyalty, betrayal, power, and corruption.

Shakespeare's language in Hamlet is both beautiful and complex. He uses metaphors, puns, and double meanings to create a rich and vivid world. The play's famous quotes, such as "Frailty, thy name is woman!" and "A little more than kin, a little less than kind," have entered the English language and are still widely used today.

The characters in Hamlet are some of the most memorable in literature. Hamlet himself is a complex and enigmatic figure, torn between his desire for revenge and his moral and philosophical doubts. His relationship with Ophelia, his love interest, is equally complex, and her tragic death adds to the play's sense of pathos. Other characters, such as Claudius, Gertrude, and Polonius, are also well-developed and add depth and nuance to the story.

Over the years, Hamlet has been adapted and reinterpreted in countless ways. It has been made into films, television shows, plays, and operas. Each adaptation brings a new perspective to the play, highlighting different themes and characters. Despite its age, Hamlet remains as relevant today as it was when it was first written.

In conclusion, Hamlet is a timeless classic that continues to fascinate and inspire audiences around the world. Its exploration of the human condition, its powerful language, and its unforgettable characters make it one of the greatest works of literature ever written.

"To be or not to be that is the question:"

I’ve always had the intention to have a conversation with my mate George regarding Hamlet, and I figure this is as opportune a moment as any to do so.

There are diverse aspects that I would discuss with different individuals about Hamlet. Given that this is nearly a perfect play, one would expect there to be numerous and varied things that could be said about it.

The strangest thing about Hamlet is that people almost always tend to repeat the same statement – they invariably say, “Oh yes, Hamlet, the man who hesitates.” I’ve stated it previously and I’ll say it once more. I don’t support capital punishment, but I do believe that corporal punishment is highly misjudged. And if one doesn’t deserve a slap for stating that Hamlet hesitates, it’s difficult to envision what one should be slapped for at all.

Aristotle was an outstanding fellow, one of my favorites. In his Poetics, he阐述了 what he believes constitutes a good tragedy. The first requirement is a fall from grace. It can hardly be considered a tragedy if the tragic figure is already at the lowest ebb. There has to be a descent, otherwise, there is truly no tragedy. Thus, tragedies typically center around kings and the like – not (pardon my French, but I’ve just completed reading Simenon) ‘common folk’. Miller’s Death of a Salesman is renowned as a modern tragedy, not least because it violates this Aristotelian stipulation that the tragic figure must be from the upper classes.

Aristotle then opined that if a play is to function as a tragedy, the person on the verge of experiencing a tragic fall should possess some flaw that is quite ‘human’ and thereby understandable to the audience. The emotion that the writer of a tragic play aims to convey to his audience is essentially, ‘there but for the grace of God go I’. The flaw needs to be relatively easy to identify – pride, for instance, or lust – something easily recognizable and it must be the cause of the downfall.

Well, Hamlet is the Prince of Denmark, so he has a significant distance to fall. But precisely what is his tragic flaw? And this is where so many hastily assert, “He hesitates.” However, I must respectfully disagree.

I believe Hamlet is an enlightenment figure in an era that is only just (and even then, not entirely) casting off the final vestiges of the Dark Ages – and Shakespeare is an enlightenment figure doing much the same. It’s crucial to remember that Shakespeare is writing during the reign of King James. James was an extremely fascinating king – not merely because he was homosexual and spent a great deal of time pursuing young men around the castle. But for me, the most revealing story about him – and he is mostly remembered for the Bible that bears his name – pertains to his new bride’s journey from Norway. On her way to England, a storm blew up, making her crossing incredibly perilous and terrifying. James was not pleased. He determined that the storm was caused by the malevolence of local witches (as one does) – so a considerable number of elderly women were rounded up and killed for daring to cause such an annoyance for his new bride. As I mentioned, the Enlightenment hasn’t quite taken hold, but we’re getting there.

In my view, those who claim that Hamlet hesitates are of the Dark Ages mindset. What occurs in the story? Hamlet is summoned by his best friend to witness his father’s ghost wandering around at night – his father’s ghost informs him that he has been murdered by Hamlet’s uncle and that Hamlet should kill his uncle in retaliation. In the Dark Ages, this would have sufficed.

However, Hamlet decides to test what the ghost has told him by staging a play in which the circumstances of the murder are reenacted in front of his uncle to see if he gives himself away – he does, and Hamlet almost immediately attempts to kill him (deciding against it on religious grounds the first opportunity that presents itself – interestingly) and then mistakenly kills the Prime Minister approximately five minutes later.

So, does he hesitate? Well, yes. But only in the sense that attempting to verify the advice provided by a ghost before murdering your uncle is a prudent course of action. The fact that pausing is anything but reasonable after the Enlightenment should give us cause for thought (which is precisely all that Hamlet does – hardly a ‘tragic flaw’).

I adore this play – I think it is one of the greatest works ever composed in our language. I love the way Shakespeare explores Hamlet’s madness and contrasts it with Ophelia’s genuine (and horrifying) madness. Imagine your lover killing your father – what a complete nightmare. I’ve never comprehended why there is no such thing as an Ophelia complex. Not least because it seems to me that many women must feel that being with their husband/lover must be akin to killing off their family.

There is so much in this play to discuss – it is truly inexhaustible. The fact that people persist in going on and on about it being about hesitation is really saying one of the most tedious things about it. Hamlet is grappling with forces greater than himself – he is striving to understand those forces, as he is a thoughtful, rational individual, but sometimes we are too close to the events unfolding in our lives to truly perceive – even if we are exceptionally intelligent. Sometimes only those on the outside can see and understand. There are also some interesting Oedipal themes at play here.

The only aspect that troubles me about this play is that at the end, everyone ends up dead – I mean, if it weren’t for Hamlet, even Horatio would have passed away. I’m not certain that this is really the most satisfying conclusion to a play – where the only way for things to continue is for everyone affected to be deceased. Lear is very similar, but even worse in many respects. Death always seems like the easy way out in these matters – the real tragedy of human existence isn’t death, but being compelled to carry on living. As Oedipus must endure, even after gouging out his own eyes. Ah, but you know what those bloody Greeks are like, George. ‘Unyielding’ is the word I’m searching for.

The first time I read this book, I was in high school. It was an 80 - page book. The story seemed so short and simple that I wondered, "Why do so many people say this is such a complex play/book?"

A couple of years later, I bought a special edition of 592 pages. Too much? No! Why not? Because the play was written in Shakespearean English, and every single word that was not in standard English was explained at the bottom of the page. It also explained the context and the uses one could have from that word.

Ok, so I read that version and it was a real challenge. Not because it was a bad story at all, but now I truly understand people who say that Shakespeare was such a special writer, and I wholeheartedly agree!

Well, about the story... It's fascinating! I loved how Shakespeare made Hamlet such a special character. It was very difficult for Hamlet to take action, it was like "almost, almost!"

I feel Shakespeare wanted to express himself through Hamlet. His multiple personalities during the play reminded me a bit of Shakespeare's life.

On the other hand, I really LOVED how this play ends. What a bloody and violent ending, it's terrific!

Recommended? Absolutely, but a simple version, because the original might be too difficult and slow to read.

The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, William Shakespeare

The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, often simply called Hamlet, is a remarkable tragedy penned by William Shakespeare between 1599 and 1602. Set in the backdrop of Denmark, the play unfolds a gripping tale. Prince Hamlet returns from his studies in Germany to his home in Helsingborg, Denmark, to attend his father's funeral. Little does he know that his father has been mysteriously murdered, and no one is aware of the true culprit. Adding to his turmoil, he discovers that his mother has married his uncle Claudius, who has now seized the throne. Hamlet's doubts and suspicions begin to surface when the ghost of his father appears to him, revealing the truth about his murder and demanding revenge. In his quest for vengeance, Hamlet makes several mistakes, leading to tragic consequences. He accidentally kills Ophelia's father, Polonius, who was spying on him behind a curtain. Ophelia, distraught by her father's death, drowns herself in a river. Eventually, after a series of events and a final confrontation with Laertes, Hamlet gets his revenge on Claudius. However, in the end, both Hamlet and Laertes are killed, along with Gertrude. The play is a profound exploration of themes such as revenge, madness, loyalty, and betrayal, and is considered one of the greatest works of world literature.

The characters in the play are diverse and complex. Claudius is the cunning and ambitious king who murders his own brother to gain the throne. Hamlet is the tormented prince, torn between his desire for revenge and his moral dilemmas. Gertrude is the queen, who is caught between her love for her son and her new husband. Ophelia is the innocent and beautiful daughter of Polonius, and Hamlet's love interest. Horatio is Hamlet's loyal friend, who stands by him throughout his ordeal. Laertes is Ophelia's brother, who seeks revenge for his father and sister's deaths. The play also features a host of other characters, each with their own unique personalities and motives.

The Tragedy of Hamlet has been translated into many languages and has been performed countless times on stage and screen. It continues to captivate audiences with its powerful story, memorable characters, and profound themes. Shakespeare's masterful use of language and his ability to create complex and believable characters make this play a timeless classic.

Oh yeah,

I read Hamlet again… on LIVE, out loud, in its entirety…because of course I did.

It was an experience like no other. Reading Shakespeare's masterpiece aloud in real-time, with an audience watching and listening, added a whole new level of excitement and pressure. But I was determined to do it justice, to bring the words to life and let their beauty and power shine through.

As I began reading, I could feel the energy in the room. The words flowed from my lips, and I could sense the audience's attention focused on me. It was both thrilling and nerve-wracking, but I pushed through and continued reading, scene after scene, act after act.

By the end of the performance, I was exhausted but also elated. I had accomplished something that I had always dreamed of doing, and I had shared the magic of Hamlet with others. It was a moment that I will never forget, and I can't wait to do it again.

Let me introduce you to one of the less-seen literary works.

"Hamlet" is a revenge tragedy about a misogynistic man. His father, who was a king, died two months ago. One night, Hamlet's beloved Horatio sees a spirit that appears to be Hamlet's father. This is told to Hamlet. Hamlet himself goes to see what's going on. He meets with the spirit, and the spirit tells him that his uncle poured poison into his ear while he was sleeping and killed him, and took the throne and his mother. The spirit asks Hamlet to take revenge.

But Hamlet is smarter than these words. He knows that spirits are usually sadistic and take pleasure in the pain of others. So he thinks and decides that a better way to test the words of the spirit and get the evidence of the king's guilt is to write a play and stage it based on the story the spirit told him, and invite everyone, and also tell Horatio to pay attention to the reaction of his uncle, so that they can know whether this incident really happened or not.

Read the rest of the story by yourself.

----------------------

Sorry, but really, I couldn't help but notice this story.

I mean, I was really laughing out loud during several scenes and dialogues.

Especially when Hamlet said that this guy in childhood even used to blush when his mother touched his chest, I was laughing so hard that I was crying.

I always thought that maybe I wouldn't like Hamlet that much, but I really liked him and enjoyed reading it. I'm the most ordinary reader and viewer possible, and after "Macbeth", this was the second Shakespeare work I read, and I want to say that even I can understand why Shakespeare's works have passed through the filter of time so easily and will probably remain alive until the end of human life.

He writes in such a way that a person gets interested in the characters and scenes.

What is the goal of each character?

Why did a character say such a thing?

Did he mean exactly what he said or something else that we may never know?

What really happened between these characters?

This translation, although it only changed the presence or absence and made it less effective, had a lot of footnotes and good explanations. Of course, it was strange that it didn't explain why the presence or absence was changed to existence or non-existence.

I also had the translation by Azhin, and that was also good, but it had fewer footnotes. I also checked the translation by Tahami, but it seemed very difficult to read.

For the first reading, in my opinion, this translation is better.