# Fear and Trembling, Problema III

Frygt og Bæven · Søren Kierkegaard · Problemata

Source: https://1732studios.com/books/kierkegaard/problema-iii. Data: https://1732studios.com/books/kierkegaard/problema-iii.json.


Var det ethisk forsvarligt af Abraham, at han fortiede sit Forehavende for Sara, for Elieser, for Isaak?  
Was it ethically defensible of Abraham that he concealed his undertaking from Sarah, from Eliezer, from Isaac?
> «fortie» — to keep silent about: «fortie» (here past tense «fortiede») means to pass over in silence, to keep something hidden by not speaking of it. Note the period spelling «ethisk» (modern «etisk») and the capitalized noun «Forehavende» (undertaking, design). Silence — «Taushed», «Skjulthed» — is the running theme of this whole section.

Det Ethiske er som saadant det Almene.  
The ethical is as such the universal.
> «det Almene» — the universal: «det Almene» (the universal, the general) is a key term in this book: the realm of shared, public moral law that applies to everyone alike. Kierkegaard equates «det Ethiske» (the ethical) with it. The drama of Abraham is whether «den Enkelte» (the single individual) can ever stand higher than «det Almene».

som det Almene er det igjen det Aabenbare.  
as the universal it is in turn the manifest.
> «det Aabenbare» — the manifest, the disclosed: «det Aabenbare» means that which is open, revealed, out in the public light — the opposite of «det Skjulte» (the hidden). Period orthography: «Aabenbare» with «aa» (modern «åbenbare») and «igjen» with «gj» (modern «igen»).

Den Enkelte er som umiddelbar sandselig og sjælelig bestemmet den Skjulte.  
The single individual, as immediately sensuous and psychical, determined as such, is the hidden one.
> «den Enkelte» — the single individual: «den Enkelte» (the single individual) is Kierkegaard's signature category, set against «det Almene» (the universal). Here the individual, taken in his merely immediate, sensuous-psychical existence, is «den Skjulte» — the hidden one, who has not yet disclosed himself in the universal.

Hans ethiske Opgave er da den, at vikle sig ud af sin Skjulthed og blive aabenbar i det Almene.  
His ethical task is then to wind himself out of his hiddenness and become manifest in the universal.
> «Skjulthed» — hiddenness, concealment: «Skjulthed» (hiddenness, concealment) is the central category of this section. The ethical demands that the individual «blive aabenbar» — become manifest, disclosed — in «det Almene». The whole problem is whether there can be a justified «Skjulthed» that stands above the ethical. Note: «Skjulthed» retains «skj» in both the 1843 text and in modern Danish — the verb «skjule» (to hide) is the established exception to the skj→sk reform, and its derivatives «skjult» and «skjulthed» likewise keep the j.

Hver Gang han da vil forblive i det Skjulte, da forsynder han sig og ligger i Anfægtelse, hvoraf han kun kommer ud ved at aabenbare sig. …  
Every time he then wishes to remain in concealment, he sins and lies in spiritual trial, out of which he comes only by disclosing himself. …
> «Anfægtelse» — spiritual trial, temptation: «Anfægtelse» is a hard term: a spiritual assault or trial, an inner temptation that contests one's resolve (cf. German «Anfechtung», a Lutheran term). It is sharply distinguished in this book from «Fristelse» (ordinary temptation): for the knight of faith the ethical itself can become the «Anfægtelse». The trailing «…» is in the source — this is an abridged quotation of an earlier passage.

Her staae vi atter ved det samme Punkt.  
Here we stand again at the same point.
> «staae» — doubled vowel, period spelling: «staae» (we stand; modern «står») shows the 1843 doubled-vowel orthography. Compare «laae», «faae», «gaae» elsewhere in the text. «atter» = again; «Punkt» = point.

Er der ikke en Skjulthed, som har sin Grund deri, at den Enkelte som den Enkelte er højere end det Almene, saa lader Abrahams Adfærd sig ikke forsvare; thi han oversaae de ethiske Melleminstantser.  
If there is not a hiddenness grounded in this, that the single individual as the single individual is higher than the universal, then Abraham's conduct cannot be defended; for he overlooked the intermediate ethical instances.
> Conditional «Er der … saa …»: Danish marks the conditional by inversion: «Er der ikke en Skjulthed … saa lader Abrahams Adfærd sig ikke forsvare» = 'If there is not a hiddenness … then Abraham's conduct cannot be defended.' «thi» = for (causal), a formal conjunction. «Melleminstantser» (period spelling) = the intermediate instances/authorities the ethical would normally invoke.

Er der derimod en saadan Skjulthed, saa staae vi ved Paradoxet der ikke lader sig mediere, da det netop bervoer derpaa, at den Enkelte som den Enkelte er højere end det Almene, men det Almene er netop Mediationen.  
If, on the other hand, there is such a hiddenness, then we stand at the paradox that does not let itself be mediated, since it rests precisely on this, that the single individual as the single individual is higher than the universal — but the universal is precisely the mediation.
> «Paradoxet» — the paradox: «Paradoxet» (the paradox) is the heart of the book: that the single individual stands higher than the universal in a way reason cannot «mediere» (mediate). «Mediation»/«mediere» are Hegelian terms — for Hegel the universal mediates all contradiction, but the paradox of faith refuses mediation. «bervoer» is an OCR error in the source edition for «beroer» (rests upon); preserved verbatim.

Den hegelske Philosophi antager ingen berettiget Skjulthed, ingen berettiget Incommensurabilitet.  
Hegelian philosophy assumes no justified hiddenness, no justified incommensurability.

Den er da i Conseqvents med sig selv, naar den fordrer Aabenhbarelse, men den er ikke paa det Rene, naar den vil ansee Abraham for Troens Fader og tale om Troen.  
It is therefore consistent with itself when it demands disclosure, but it is not in the clear when it would regard Abraham as the father of faith and speak of faith.
> «Troens Fader» — the father of faith: «Troens Fader» = the father of faith, Abraham's traditional title. «Aabenhbarelse» is an OCR misprint in the source for «Aabenbarelse» (disclosure, revelation), kept verbatim. «paa det Rene» = literally 'on the clean', i.e. clear, settled, in good order — an idiom.

Troen er nemlig ikke den første Umiddelbarhed, men en senere.  
For faith is not the first immediacy, but a later one.
> «Umiddelbarhed» — immediacy: «Umiddelbarhed» (immediacy) is the unreflected, given state of the self. Kierkegaard's claim, against Hegel, is that «Troen» (faith) is not the first immediacy (the aesthetic) but «en senere» — a later immediacy, reached after reflection and resignation. «nemlig» = namely, for (explanatory).

Den første Umiddelbarhed er det Æsthetiske, og her kan den hegelske Philosophi vel have Ret.  
The first immediacy is the aesthetic, and here Hegelian philosophy may well be right.
> «det Æsthetiske» — the aesthetic: «det Æsthetiske» (the aesthetic) is the first of Kierkegaard's stages of existence — immediate life, lived in the moment. Period spelling «Æsthetiske» (modern «æstetiske»). «vel» here = 'no doubt, may well' — a concessive.

Men Troen er ikke det Æsthetiske eller ogsaa har Troen aldrig været til, fordi den altid har været til.  
But faith is not the aesthetic — or else faith has never existed, because it has always existed.

Det bliver det Bedste her at betragte hele Sagen reent æsthetisk og til den Ende at gaae ind i en æsthetisk Overveielse, i hvilken jeg vil bede Læseren momentviis ganske at hengive sig, medens jeg, for at bidrage Mit dertil, vil modificere min Fremstilling i Forhold til Gjenstandene.  
It will be best here to consider the whole matter purely aesthetically, and to that end to enter upon an aesthetic deliberation, into which I will ask the reader for the moment to give himself over entirely, while I, in order to contribute my part, will modify my presentation in relation to the objects.
> «Overveielse» — deliberation, reflection: «Overveielse» = a weighing-over, a deliberation or reflective consideration. «momentviis» = momentarily, for the moment; «hengive sig» = to give oneself over, surrender. «Gjenstandene» (the objects/subject-matter) shows the «gj» spelling (modern «genstandene»).

Den Kategori, jeg lidt nærmere vil betragte, er: det Interessante, en Kategori, der fornemlig i vor Tid, netop fordi Tiden lever én discrimine rerum, har faaet stor Betydning; thi den er egentlig Vendepunktets Kategori.  
The category I will look at a little more closely is: the interesting — a category that, especially in our age, precisely because the age lives in a crisis of things, has acquired great significance; for it is really the category of the turning point.

Man skulde derfor ikke, som stundom skeer, efter selv pro virili at have elsket den, lade "haant om den, fordi den voxede fra Een, men man skulde heller ikke være altfor graadig efter den; thi vist er det, at det, at blive interessant, eller at Eens Liv er interessant, ikke er en Opgave for Kunstflid, men et skjæbnesvangert Privilegium, der som ethvert Privilegium i Aandens Verden kun kjøbes i dyb Smerte.  
One should therefore not, as sometimes happens, after having oneself loved it with all one's might, treat it with scorn because one has outgrown it; but neither should one be all too greedy for it — for this is certain, that to become interesting, or that one's life is interesting, is no task for artful diligence, but a fateful privilege which, like every privilege in the world of the spirit, is bought only in deep pain.

Saaledes var Socrates det interessanteste Menneske, der har levet, hans Liv det interessanteste, der er blevet ført, men denne Existents var ham anviist af Guden, og forsaavidt han selv maatte erhverve den, da har han ogsaa ikke været ukjendt med Møijie og Smerte.  
Thus Socrates was the most interesting human being who has lived, his life the most interesting that has been led; but this existence was assigned to him by the god, and insofar as he himself had to acquire it, he too was no stranger to toil and pain.
> «anviist af Guden» — assigned by the god: «anviist» (assigned, allotted; modern «anvist») — Socrates' interesting existence was not chosen but given to him by «Guden» (the god / the deity). «Møijie» = toil, trouble (modern «møje»); «ukjendt» = unacquainted, a stranger to (the «kj» spelling).

At ville tage en saadan Existents forfængelig, sømmer sig ikke for Nogen, der tænker alvorligere over Livet, og dog er det ikke sjeldent i vor Tid, at man seer Exempler paa en saadan Stræben.  
To wish to take such an existence in vain does not befit anyone who thinks more earnestly about life; and yet it is not rare in our age that one sees examples of such striving.

Det Interessante er forøvrigt en Grændsekategori, et Confinium mellem Æsthetiken og Ethiken.  
The interesting is, moreover, a boundary category, a confinium between aesthetics and ethics.

Forsaavidt maa Overveielsen bestandig streife over paa Ethikens Gebeet, medens den for at kunne faae Betydning maa med æsthetisk Inderlighed og Concupiscents gribe Problemet.  
To that extent the deliberation must constantly stray over onto the territory of ethics, while, in order to be able to acquire significance, it must grasp the problem with aesthetic inwardness and concupiscence.
> «Inderlighed» — inwardness: «Inderlighed» (inwardness, inner fervor) is a key Kierkegaardian value — passionate inner appropriation, as against detached objectivity. «Concupiscents» (concupiscence) = intense desire or longing. «Gebeet» (German loan, «Gebiet») = territory, domain; «streife over» = to stray/range across.

Sligt indlader i vor Tid Ethiken sig sjeldnere paa.  
Such a thing ethics in our age engages in more rarely.

Grunden skal være, at der ikke kan blive Plads dertil i Systemet.  
The reason is said to be that there can be no room for it in the System.

Saa kunde man jo gjøre det i Monographier, og desuden, vil man ikke gjøre det vidtløftigt, saa kan man gjøre det kort, og dog opnaae det Samme, dersom man nemlig har Prædikatet i sin Magt; thi eet eller to Prædikater kan forraade en heel Verden.  
Then one could of course do it in monographs; and besides, if one does not wish to do it at length, one can do it briefly and yet attain the same thing — provided, that is, one has the predicate in one's power; for one or two predicates can betray a whole world.
> «vidtløftigt» — at length, ramblingly: «vidtløftig» = expansive, long-winded, at great length. «Prædikatet» = the predicate (a grammatical/logical term — what is said of a subject). «forraade» = to betray, to give away or disclose. Note the conditional «dersom» (if) echoed from the book's opening eulogy.

Skulde der i Systemet heller ikke være Plads til saadanne Smaaord ?  
Should there in the System not be room even for such small words?
> «Smaaord» — little words; spaced question mark: «Smaaord» = little words (modern «småord»), with the doubled «aa». The space before the «?» reproduces the typesetting of the 1843/source edition; kept verbatim. The line is gently ironic at the System's expense.

Aristoteles siger i hans udødelige Poetik: dvo ur ovv Tov uvdov usQn, TT8Qs TAVT 8071, TTEQITETELG XL VAYVWQLGIS (efr. cap. 11).  
Aristotle says in his immortal Poetics: two parts, then, of the plot are these — peripeteia and recognition (cf. ch. 11).

Det er naturligt kun det andet Moment, der her beskjæftiger mig: &rgyvwgrøs, Gjenkjendelsen.  
Naturally it is only the second element that occupies me here: anagnorisis, the recognition.
> «Gjenkjendelsen» — recognition (anagnorisis): «Gjenkjendelse» (modern «genkendelse») = recognition, the Greek «anagnorisis» — the dramatic moment when what was hidden is recognized. Note the «gj» and «kj» period spellings. The garbled Greek word «&rgyvwgrøs» (for «ἀναγνώρισις») is kept verbatim from the source.

Overalt hvor der kan være Tale om en Gjenkjendelse, der er éo ipso Tale om en foregaaende Skjulthed.  
Wherever there can be talk of a recognition, there is eo ipso talk of a preceding hiddenness.

Som da Gjenkjendelsen bliver det Løsende, det Relaxerende, saaledes er Skjultheden det Spændende i det dramatiske Liv.  
Just as recognition then becomes the resolving, the relaxing element, so hiddenness is the tension-creating element in dramatic life.
> «det Spændende» — the tension: A neat opposition: «det Løsende» / «det Relaxerende» (the loosening, relaxing element — recognition) versus «det Spændende» (the tightening, suspense-creating element — hiddenness). «spænde» means both to stretch/tighten and to create suspense.

Hvad Aristoteles i det Foregaaende af samme Capitel udvikler angaaende Tragediens forskjellige Værd alt i Forhold til som tsgsnsres« og avayvwgss carambolere, samt om den enkelte og den dobbelte Gjenkjendelse, kan jeg her ikke tage Hensyn til, om det end frister ved sin Inderlighed og sin stille Fortabelse især den, der længe nok blev trættet af Oversigtsmændenes overfladiske Alvidenhed.  
What Aristotle develops in the preceding part of the same chapter concerning the differing worth of tragedies, all according to how peripeteia and anagnorisis collide, as well as concerning the single and the double recognition, I cannot take into account here — however much it tempts, by its inwardness and its quiet absorption, especially anyone long enough wearied by the surveyors' superficial omniscience.

En almindeligere Bemærkning maa her finde sin Plads.  
A more general remark must find its place here.

I den græske Tragedie er Skjultheden (og som en Følge deraf Gjenkjendelsen) en episk Rest, der har sin Grund i et Fatum, i hvilket den dramatiske Handling forsvinder, hvorfra denne har sit dunkle gaadefulde Udspring.  
In Greek tragedy the hiddenness (and, as a consequence of it, the recognition) is an epic remnant grounded in a Fatum, in which the dramatic action disappears, from which the latter takes its dark, enigmatic origin.

Deraf kommer det, at den Virkning, en græsk Tragedie frembringer, har en Lighed med Indtrykket af en Marmor-Statue, der mangler Øiets Magt.  
Hence it comes that the effect a Greek tragedy produces bears a likeness to the impression of a marble statue that lacks the power of the eye.

Den græske Tragedie er blind.  
Greek tragedy is blind.

Derfor hører der en vis Abstraktion til for ret at lade sig paavirke af den.  
Therefore a certain abstraction is required in order to be properly affected by it.

En Søn myrder sin Fader, men først bag efter faaer han at vide, at det er hans Fader.  
A son murders his father, but only afterward does he come to know that it is his father.

En Søster vil. offre sin Broder, men i det afgjørende Øieblik faaer hun det at vide.  
A sister is about to sacrifice her brother, but at the decisive moment she comes to know it.

Dette Tragiske kan mindre beskjæftige vor reflecterende Tid.  
This kind of tragedy can occupy our reflective age less.

Det nyere Drama har opgivet Skjæbnen, har dramatisk emanciperet sig, er seende, skuer ind i sig selv, optager Skjæbnen i sin dramatiske Bevidsthed.  
The more modern drama has given up fate, has dramatically emancipated itself, is sighted, gazes into itself, takes fate up into its dramatic consciousness.
> «er seende» — is sighted: Against the «blind» Greek tragedy of s34, modern drama «er seende» (is sighted, seeing) — it «skuer ind i sig selv» (gazes into itself) and absorbs «Skjæbnen» (fate) into its own «Bevidsthed» (consciousness). Hiddenness thereby becomes the hero's free, responsible act rather than imposed doom.

Skjultheden og Aabenbarelsen er da Heltens fri Gjerning, for hvilken han er ansvarlig. .  
Hiddenness and disclosure are then the hero's free deed, for which he is responsible.
> «fri Gjerning» — free deed: «Gjerning» (deed, act; modern «gerning») — in modern drama concealment and disclosure are the hero's «fri Gjerning» for which he is «ansvarlig» (responsible). This refrain recurs across the section. The stray trailing period is a misprint in the source, kept verbatim.

Ogsaa i det nyere Drama hører Gjenkjendelsen og Skjultheden med som et væsentligt Element.  
In the more modern drama too, recognition and hiddenness belong as an essential element.

At anføre Exempler herpaa vilde være for vidtløftigt.  
To adduce examples of this would be too long-winded.

Jeg er høflig nok til at antage, at Enhver i vor Tid, der er saa æsthetisk vellystig, saa potent og opildnet, at den undfanger lige saa let som Agerhønen, der efter Aristoteles Udsagn har nok af at høre Hannens Røst eller dens Flugt over Hovedet paa den; jeg antager, at Enhver, blot han hører det Ord ,Skjulthed", let vil kunne ryste en halv Snees Romaner og Comedier ud af Ærmet.  
I am polite enough to assume that everyone in our age is so aesthetically voluptuous, so potent and inflamed, that he conceives just as easily as the partridge, which according to Aristotle's account needs only to hear the cock's voice or its flight over its head; I assume that everyone, merely on hearing the word "hiddenness," will easily be able to shake half a score of novels and comedies out of his sleeve.

Jeg han desaarsag fatte mig kort og saaledes strax blot antyde en almindeligere Bemærkning.  
I can therefore be brief and so at once merely intimate a more general remark.

Dersom den, der leger Skjul og derved bringer den dramatiske Gjæring i Stykket, skjuler noget Nonsens, saa faae vi en Comedie, staaer han derimod i Forhold til Ideen, da kan kan nærme sig til at blive en tragisk Helt.  
If the one who plays hide-and-seek, and thereby brings the dramatic ferment into the play, is hiding some nonsense, then we get a comedy; if, on the other hand, he stands in relation to the Idea, then he can approach becoming a tragic hero.
> «Gjæring» — ferment: «Gjæring» (modern «gæring») = fermentation, ferment — the working, churning tension hiddenness brings into a drama (cf. the «gjærende Magt» of the book's opening eulogy). «leger Skjul» = plays hide-and-seek. The doubled «kan kan» is a misprint in the source, kept verbatim.

Her blot et Exempel paa det Comiske.  
Here merely an example of the comic.

En Mand sminker sig og gaaer med Paryk.  
A man puts on makeup and wears a wig.

Samme Mand vil gjerne gjøre Lykke hos det smukke Kjøn, han er sikker nok paa Seiren ved Hjælp af Sminken og Parykken, der ubetinget gjør ham uimodstaaelig.  
This same man would gladly make his fortune with the fair sex; he is sure enough of victory by means of the makeup and the wig, which unconditionally make him irresistible.
> «gjøre Lykke hos det smukke Kjøn»: An idiom: «gjøre Lykke» = to make a hit, win favor, have success; «det smukke Kjøn» = the fair sex (modern «det smukke køn»). Period spellings cluster here: «Kjøn», «Seiren» (the victory), «uimodstaaelig» (irresistible, with doubled «aa»).

Han fanger en Pige og er paa Lykkens Tinde.  
He catches a girl and is at the pinnacle of happiness.

Nu kommer Humlen; kan han tilstaae det, taber han ikke hele sin bedaarende Magt, naar han viser sig som en slet og ret ja endog en skaldet Mandsperson, taber han ikke derved igjen den Elskede. —  
Now comes the catch: can he confess it — does he not lose his whole bewitching power when he shows himself as a plain and simple, indeed even a bald, male person; does he not thereby lose the beloved again. —
> «Humlen» — the catch, the nub: «Humlen» (here «Humlen i det» understood) = the crux, the catch, the nub of the matter — an idiom (literally 'the hops [in it]'). «slet og ret» = plain and simple; «skaldet» = bald. The em dash «—» that ends the sentence is in the source.

Skjultheden er hans fri Handling, for hvilken ogsaa Æsthetiken gjør ham ansvarlig.  
The hiddenness is his free action, for which aesthetics too makes him responsible.

Denne Videnskab er ingen Ven af skaldede Hyklere, den prisgiver ham for Latteren.  
This science is no friend of bald hypocrites; it abandons him to laughter.
> «prisgiver … for Latteren» — abandons to laughter: «prisgive» = to give up, abandon, expose (someone to something). «Videnskab» (science) here means aesthetics as a discipline. «Hyklere» = hypocrites. The comic hider, hiding mere nonsense, is delivered over «for Latteren» — to ridicule.

Dette maa være nok for blot at antyde hvad jeg mener; det Comiske kan ikke være Gjenstand for denne Undersøgelses Interesse.  
This must suffice merely to intimate what I mean; the comic cannot be the object of this inquiry's interest.

Veien, som jeg har at gaae, er at gjennemføre Skjultheden dialektisk gjennem Æsthetiken og Ethiken; thi det gjælder om, at den æstlietiske Skjulthed og Paradoxet vise sig i deres absolute Forskjellighed.  
The way I have to go is to carry hiddenness dialectically through aesthetics and ethics; for the point is that the aesthetic hiddenness and the paradox should show themselves in their absolute difference.
> «dialektisk» — dialectically: «dialektisk» (dialectically) — to work the concept of «Skjulthed» through its stages (aesthetic, then ethical) so that the merely «æsthetiske Skjulthed» and the «Paradoxet» (the paradox of faith) stand out in «absolut Forskjellighed» (absolute difference). «æstlietiske» is a misprint for «æsthetiske», kept verbatim.

Et Par Exempler.  
A couple of examples.

En Pige er hemmelig forelsket i Een, uden at de dog definitivt have tilstaaet hinanden deres Kjærlighed.  
A girl is secretly in love with someone, without their having, however, definitively confessed their love to each other.
> «Kjærlighed» — love: «Kjærlighed» (love; modern «kærlighed») with the «kj» period spelling. «forelsket i Een» = in love with someone; «tilstaae» = to confess, avow. This begins the first of the two aesthetic examples of justified silence.

Forældrene tvinge hende til at ægte en Anden (der kan desuden være et Pietets-Hensyn, der bestemmer hende), hun adlyder Forældrene, hun skjuler sin Kjærlighed ,for ikke at gjøre den Anden ulykkelig, og Ingen skal nogensinde faae at vide, hvad hun lider.” —  
The parents force her to marry another (there may, besides, be a consideration of filial piety that determines her); she obeys the parents, she hides her love, "so as not to make the other unhappy, and no one shall ever come to know what she suffers." —
> «ægte» — to marry; «Pietets-Hensyn»: «ægte» (verb) = to marry, wed. «Pietets-Hensyn» = a consideration of piety/filial duty. The mixed quotation marks — opening comma-quote «,for ikke...» and closing «.”» — reproduce the source typesetting and are kept verbatim. «faae at vide» = come to know; «lider» = suffers.

En Ungersvend kan ved et eneste Ord komme i Besiddelse af Gjenstanden for sine Længsler og sine urolige Drømme.  
A young man can, by a single word, come into possession of the object of his longings and his restless dreams.
> «Ungersvend» — young man, youth: «Ungersvend» = a young man, a youth, a bachelor — a somewhat archaic, slightly poetic term. «Længsler» = longings, yearnings. This is the second of the paired aesthetic examples — the male counterpart to the secretly-in-love girl.

Dette lille Ord vil imidlertid compromittere, ja maaskee (hvo veed det?) ødelægge en heel Familie; han beslutter høimodigen at blive i sit Skjul, »Pigen skal aldrig faae det at vide, at hun maaskee kan blive lykkelig ved en Andens Haand."  
This little word will, however, compromise — indeed perhaps (who knows?) destroy a whole family; he resolves magnanimously to remain in his concealment: "The girl shall never come to know it, so that she may perhaps become happy at another's hand."
> «høimodigen» — magnanimously: «høimodig» = high-minded, magnanimous, generous (modern «højmodig»); the «-en» is an old adverbial ending. «hvo veed det?» = who knows? («hvo» is the archaic 'who'). Note the opening guillemet «»Pigen...» — the source opens this inner quotation with a closing-style guillemet, kept verbatim.

Skade at dette Par Mennesker, der begge to hver især ere skjulte for de respektive Elskede, ogsaa ere skjulte for hinanden, her lod sig ellers tilveiebringe en mærkværdig høiere Eenhed. —  
A pity that this pair of people, who are each of them hidden from their respective beloveds, are also hidden from each other; otherwise a remarkable higher unity could be brought about here. —
> «høiere Eenhed» — higher unity: «Eenhed» = unity (modern «enhed»), with the doubled «ee». The wry observation: the secretly-loving girl and the magnanimous youth would make a «mærkværdig høiere Eenhed» (remarkable higher unity) if only they were not hidden from one another too. «tilveiebringe» = to bring about.

Deres Skjulthed er en fri Gjerning, for hvilken de ogsaa ere Æsthetiken ansvarlige.  
Their hiddenness is a free deed, for which they are also responsible to aesthetics.

Æsthetiken er imidlertid en høflig og følsom Videnskab, der veed flere Udveie end nogen Assistentshusforvalter.  
Aesthetics, however, is a polite and sentimental science that knows more ways out than any pawnshop manager.

Hvad gjør den da?  
What does it do then?

Den gjør Alt muligt for de Eiskende Ved Hjælp af et Tilfælde faae de respektive Makkere i det projecterede Ægteskah et Vink om den anden Parts høimodige Beslutning, det kommer til en Forklaring, de faae hinanden, og tillige Rang med virkelige Helte; thi uagtet de ikke engang have faaet Tid al sove paa Frygt og Bæven. 3. Udg. 7  
It does everything possible for the lovers: by means of a chance, the respective partners in the projected marriage get a hint of the other party's magnanimous resolve, it comes to an explanation, they get each other, and along with that rank among real heroes; for although they have not even had time to sleep on Fear and Trembling.
> «et Tilfælde» — a chance; misprints: «Tilfælde» here = a chance, a coincidence — aesthetics' favorite device for rescuing its heroes (contrast: «Ethiken har intet Tilfælde»). The source is corrupt at the page break: «Eiskende» for «Elskende» (the lovers), «Ægteskah» for «Ægteskab» (marriage), «al sove» for «at sove» — all kept verbatim. «Frygt og Bæven» here doubles as the book's own title.

deres heltemodige Beslutning, saa betragter Æsthetiken det dog som om de i mange Aar modigen havde gjennemkæmpet deres Forsæt.  
their heroic resolve, aesthetics nevertheless regards it as if for many years they had bravely fought their resolution through.
> «som om» + pluperfect subjunctive: «som om … havde gjennemkæmpet» = 'as if … had fought through' — the counterfactual «som om» takes the pluperfect. This sentence completes the «thi uagtet»-clause begun in s64 across the edition's foot-line: though they had no time even to sleep on their decision, aesthetics treats it as years of brave struggle. «modigen» = bravely (old adverbial «-en»).

Æsthetiken bryder sig nemlig ikke stort om Tiden, hvad enten det er Spøg eller Alvor, den gaaer lige hurtig for den.  
For aesthetics does not care much about time; whether it is jest or earnest, it goes equally fast for it.
> «Spøg eller Alvor» — jest or earnest: «Spøg eller Alvor» = jest or earnest — a stock pairing. The point sets up the coming contrast with ethics, which (unlike aesthetics) takes «Tiden» (time) seriously and will not let a resolve count as heroic unless it is fought through over real time.

Men Ethiken kjender ikke noget hverken til hiint Tilfælde eller hiimn Følsomhed, ikke heller har den saa hurtigt et Begreb om Tiden.  
But ethics knows nothing either of that chance or of that sentimentality, nor does it have so swift a concept of time.
> «hiint Tilfælde» — that (yonder) chance: «hiin/hiint» (that, yonder) is an archaic demonstrative pointing to something already mentioned/distant. «hiimn» is a misprint in the source for «hiin» (with «Følsomhed»), kept verbatim. Ethics rejects both aesthetics' rescuing «Tilfælde» (chance) and its «Følsomhed» (sentimentality).

Herved faaer Sagen et andet Udseende.  
By this the matter takes on a different appearance.

Ethiken er ikke god at disputere med, thi den har rene Kategorier.  
Ethics is not good to dispute with, for it has pure categories.
> «rene Kategorier» — pure categories: «rene Kategorier» = pure categories — ethics reasons with clean, unmixed concepts and so makes a formidable opponent. «ikke god at disputere med» = not good to argue with, hard to dispute with (idiomatic infinitive construction). This launches the eulogy-and-warning of ethics that follows.

Den beraaber sig ikke paa Erfaringen, der da ogsaa af alle latterlige Ting saa omtrent er den allerlatterligste, og saa langt fra at gjøre en Mand klog, at den snarere gjør ham gal, hvis han intet Højere kjender end den.  
It does not appeal to experience, which indeed, of all ridiculous things, is just about the most ridiculous of all, and so far from making a man wise that it rather makes him mad, if he knows nothing higher than it.
> «beraabe sig paa» — to appeal to: «beraabe sig paa» = to invoke, appeal to (as authority). Ethics, having «rene Kategorier», does not «beraabe sig paa Erfaringen» (appeal to experience) — which Kierkegaard mocks as the most ridiculous of authorities. «gjøre … gal» = to make mad/crazy; «intet Højere» = nothing higher.

Ethiken har intet Tilfælde, altsaa kommer det ikke til en Forklaring, den spøger ikke med Værdigheder, den lægger et uhyre Ansvar paa de spinkle Heltes Skuldre, den fordømmer det som noget formasteligt ved sin Gjerning at ville spille Forsynet, men den fordømmer ogsaa det ved sin Liden at ville gjøre det.  
Ethics has no chance, hence it does not come to an explanation; it does not jest with dignities; it lays an enormous responsibility on the frail heroes' shoulders; it condemns as presumptuous the wish, by one's deed, to play Providence — but it condemns just as much the wish, by one's suffering, to do so.
> «spille Forsynet» — to play Providence: «Forsynet» = Providence; «at ville spille Forsynet» = to want to play Providence, to arrogate God's governance to oneself. Ethics condemns this «formasteligt» (presumptuous) wish whether attempted «ved sin Gjerning» (by one's deed) or «ved sin Liden» (by one's suffering — modern «Lidelse»). «spinkle» = frail, slight.

Den byder at troe paa Virkeligheden og at have Mod til at kæmpe med alle Virkelighedens Trængsler fremfor med disse blodløse Lidelser, som man paa eget Ansvar har paataget sig, den advarer mod at troe Forstandens snilde Beregninger, der ere mere troløse end Oraklerne i Oldtiden.  
It commands one to believe in reality and to have courage to struggle with all of reality's tribulations rather than with these bloodless sufferings one has taken upon oneself at one's own responsibility; it warns against trusting the understanding's cunning calculations, which are more treacherous than the oracles of antiquity.
> «Virkelighed» — reality, actuality: «Virkelighed» (reality, actuality) — ethics commands one «at troe paa Virkeligheden» and to fight «Virkelighedens Trængsler» (reality's tribulations) rather than self-chosen «blodløse Lidelser» (bloodless sufferings). «Forstandens snilde Beregninger» = the understanding's cunning calculations, deemed «mere troløse» (more treacherous) than ancient oracles. «troe» = to believe/trust (modern «tro»).

Den advarer mod enhver utidig Høimodighed, lad Virkeligheden tage det, saa er det paa Tide at vise Mod, men saa tilbyder Ethiken selv al mulig Bistand.  
It warns against every untimely magnanimity; let reality take it, then it is time to show courage — but then ethics itself offers every possible assistance.
> «utidig Høimodighed» — untimely magnanimity: «utidig» = untimely, ill-timed; «Høimodighed» = magnanimity, high-mindedness (modern «højmodighed»). Ethics warns against premature self-sacrifice: only when «Virkeligheden tage det» (reality takes it / forces the issue) is it «paa Tide» (timely) to show courage — and then ethics gives «al mulig Bistand» (every possible help).

Var det imidlertid noget Dybere, der rørte sig i disse Tvende, var der Alvor til at see Opgaven, Alvor til at fange an, saa vil der vel komme noget ud af dem, men Ethiken kan ikke hjælpe dem, den er fornærmet; thi de have en Hemmelighed for den, en Hemmelighed, som de have faaet paa eget An- og Tilsvar.  
If, however, there were something deeper stirring in these two, if there were earnestness to see the task, earnestness to set to work, then no doubt something would come of them; but ethics cannot help them, it is offended — for they have a secret from it, a secret which they have taken upon their own account and answer.
> Conditional inversion + «de have»: «Var det imidlertid noget Dybere … saa vil der vel komme...» — conditional by inversion (if it were … then). «Tvende» = two, the pair (archaic). «de have» / «de have faaet» use the old plural verb form (modern «de har»). «paa eget An- og Tilsvar» = on one's own account and answerability — a formulaic legal-sounding pair.
> «Hemmelighed» — secret: «Hemmelighed» (secret) is what offends ethics: the pair keep something «for den» (from it). Holding a secret on one's own responsibility is exactly the «Skjulthed» ethics forbids — which sets up the closing antithesis: aesthetics demanded and rewarded hiddenness, ethics demands disclosure.

Æsthetiken fordrede altsaa Skjulthed og belønnede den, Ethiken fordrede Aabenbarelse og straffede Skjultheden.  
Aesthetics therefore demanded hiddenness and rewarded it; ethics demanded disclosure and punished hiddenness.
> The antithesis: aesthetics vs. ethics: The pivot of the section, stated as a balanced antithesis: «Æsthetiken fordrede Skjulthed og belønnede den» (aesthetics demanded hiddenness and rewarded it) versus «Ethiken fordrede Aabenbarelse og straffede Skjultheden» (ethics demanded disclosure and punished hiddenness). «fordre» = to demand; «belønne» = reward; «straffe» = punish.

Undertiden fordrer imidlertid Æsthetiken selv Aabenbarelse.  
Sometimes, however, aesthetics itself demands disclosure.

Naar Helten hildet i den æsthetiske Illusion mener ved sin Taushed at frelse et andet Menneske, da fordrer den Taushed og belønner den.  
When the hero, entangled in the aesthetic illusion, believes that by his silence he saves another human being, then it demands silence and rewards it.
> «hildet» — entangled, ensnared: «hildet» = caught, ensnared, entangled (in). The hero «hildet i den æsthetiske Illusion» (caught in the aesthetic illusion) thinks his «Taushed» (silence) saves another. «frelse» = to save, rescue. This qualifies the antithesis: aesthetics rewards silence only when it is supposed to rescue someone.

Naar derimod Helten ved sin Gjerning griber forstyrrende ind i et andet Menneskes Liv, da fordrer den Aabenbarelse.  
When, on the other hand, the hero by his deed intervenes disturbingly in another human being's life, then it demands disclosure.

Jeg staaer her ved den tragiske Helt.  
Here I stand at the tragic hero.
> «den tragiske Helt» — the tragic hero: «den tragiske Helt» (the tragic hero) is a central foil for Abraham throughout the book: he sacrifices within the ethical, for the universal, and so remains intelligible — unlike the knight of faith. Agamemnon, introduced next, is the example. «staaer» = stand (modern «står»), doubled vowel.

Jeg vil et Øieblik betragte Euripides's Iphigenia i Aulis.s: Agamemnon skal offre Iphigenia.  
I will for a moment consider Euripides's Iphigenia in Aulis: Agamemnon is to sacrifice Iphigenia.

Æsthetiken fordrer nu forsaavidt Taushed af Agamemnon, som det vilde være Helten uværdigt at søge Trøst hos noget andet Menneske, ligesom han og af Omsorg for Qvinderne bør skjule det for dem saa længe som muligt.  
Aesthetics now demands silence of Agamemnon insofar as it would be unworthy of the hero to seek consolation from any other human being, just as he ought, out of care for the women, to conceal it from them as long as possible.
> «Qvinderne» — the women: «Qvinderne» (the women; modern «kvinderne») shows the «Qv» period spelling for the «kv» sound — i.e. Clytemnestra and Iphigenia. «uværdigt» = unworthy; «Trøst» = consolation, comfort. «han og» here = «han også» (he too / he as well).

Paa den anden Side maa Helten netop for at være Helt ogsaa forsøges i den forfærdelige Anfægtelse, som Klytaimnestras og Iphigenias Taarer vil berede ham.  
On the other hand, precisely in order to be a hero, the hero must also be tried in the terrible spiritual trial that Clytemnestra's and Iphigenia's tears will prepare for him.
> «forsøges» — to be tested/tried: «forsøges» (passive of «forsøge») here = to be tried, put to the test. The hero must be tested in «Anfægtelse» (spiritual trial — cf. note at s6) by the «Taarer» (tears) of Clytemnestra and Iphigenia. «berede» = to prepare. To be a hero one must face, not flee, the trial.

Hvad gjør Æsthetiken?  
What does aesthetics do?

Den har en Udvei, den har en gammel Tjener i Beredskab, som aabenbarer Alt for Klytaimnestra.  
It has a way out: it has an old servant in readiness, who discloses everything to Clytemnestra.
> «Udvei» — a way out; the old servant: «Udvei» = a way out, an expedient (cf. the resourceful «Assistentshusforvalter» of s62). Aesthetics' device here is «en gammel Tjener» (an old servant) — in Euripides, the old slave who warns Clytemnestra — to bring about the disclosure. «i Beredskab» = in readiness; «aabenbarer» = discloses, reveals.

Nu er Alt i sin Orden.  
Now everything is in order.

Ethiken har imidlertid intet Tilfælde og ingen gammel Tjener ved Haanden.  
Ethics, however, has no chance and no old servant at hand.

Den æsthetiske Idee modsiger sig selv, saasnart den skal udføres i Virkeligheden.  
The aesthetic idea contradicts itself as soon as it is to be carried out in reality.
> «modsiger sig selv» — contradicts itself: «modsige sig selv» = to contradict oneself. The aesthetic solution (a rescuing chance, an old servant) works only on the page; «saasnart den skal udføres i Virkeligheden» (as soon as it is to be carried out in reality) it collapses — which is why ethics, dealing with «Virkelighed», demands disclosure instead.

Ethiken fordrer derfor Aabenbarelse.  
Ethics therefore demands disclosure.

Den tragiske Helt viser netop sit ethiske Mod derved, at han, ikke hildet i: nogen æsthetisk Illusion, selv er den, der forkynder: Iphigenia sin Skjæbne.  
The tragic hero shows precisely his ethical courage in this, that he, not entangled in any aesthetic illusion, is himself the one who announces to Iphigenia her fate.
> «forkynder … sin Skjæbne»: «forkynde» = to announce, proclaim, declare. The tragic hero's «ethiske Mod» (ethical courage) is that he himself, unbeguiled by aesthetic illusion, declares «Iphigenia sin Skjæbne» (to Iphigenia her fate — dative + accusative). The colon after «hildet i:» is a misprint in the source, kept verbatim.

Gjør han dette, da er den tragiske Helt Ethikens elskelige Søn, i hvem den haver Velbehagelighed.  
If he does this, then the tragic hero is ethics's beloved son, in whom it has its good pleasure.

Tier han, da kan det være fordi han derved troer at gjøre det lettere for Andre, men det kan ogsaa være, fordi han derved gjør det lettere for sig selv.  
If he keeps silent, it may be because he thereby believes he makes it easier for others; but it may also be because he thereby makes it easier for himself.
> «Tie» — to keep silent; conditional inversion: «tie» (here «tier han») = to be silent, hold one's tongue (cf. «fortie» at s1, and the pseudonym «Johannes de silentio»). «Tier han, da …» is again conditional by inversion: 'If he keeps silent, then …'. The danger of silence: it may serve the self, not others.

Dog dette veed han sig fri for.  
Yet from this he knows himself to be free.

Tier han, da paatager han sig som den Enkelte et Ansvar, forsaavidt han overseer et Argument, der kan komme udenfra.  
If he keeps silent, then he takes upon himself, as the single individual, a responsibility, insofar as he disregards an argument that may come from outside.
> «den Enkelte» takes on responsibility: To keep silent is to act «som den Enkelte» (as the single individual), assuming a private «Ansvar» (responsibility) and «overseer» (overlooks, disregards) any argument «udenfra» (from outside). This is exactly what the tragic hero may not do — he must stay within the universal — and exactly what Abraham does.

Dette kan han som tragisk Helt ikke gjøre; thi netop derfor elsker Ethiken ham, fordi han bestandig udtrykker det Almene.  
This he cannot do as a tragic hero; for precisely on that account ethics loves him, because he constantly expresses the universal.
> «udtrykker det Almene» — expresses the universal: The defining mark of the tragic hero: «han bestandig udtrykker det Almene» — he constantly expresses the universal, remaining within shared moral law. That is why ethics «elsker ham» (loves him). Abraham, by contrast, suspends the universal — the «teleological suspension of the ethical» of Problema I.

Hans Heltegjerning fordrer Mod, men til dette Mod hører ogsaa, at han ikke unddrager sig nogen Argumentation.  
His heroic deed requires courage, but to this courage also belongs that he does not withdraw himself from any argumentation.
> «unddrage sig» — to withdraw from, evade: «unddrage sig» = to withdraw oneself from, shirk, evade. The tragic hero's «Mod» (courage) includes facing every «Argumentation» (argument, reasoning) openly — he hides from nothing, which is precisely why his greatness is intelligible within the universal. «Heltegjerning» = heroic deed.

Nu er det vist, at Taarer er et forfærdeligt arqumentam ad hominem, og der var vel den, hvem Intet rørte, som dog Taarer bevægede.  
Now it is certain that tears are a terrible argumentum ad hominem, and there has surely been the man whom nothing moved, yet whom tears stirred.

I Stykket faaer Iphigenia Lov at græde, i Virkeligheden bør der indrømmes hende som Jepthas Datter 2 Maaneder til at græde ikke i Eensomhed, men ved Faderens Fødder, og bruge al sin Kunst, ,der kun er Taarer," og snoe sig "selv istedenfor en Oliegreen omkring hans Knæe (cfr. v. 1224). —  
In the play Iphigenia is allowed to weep; in reality she ought, like Jephthah's daughter, to be granted two months to weep — not in solitude, but at her father's feet — and to use all her art, "which is only tears," and to wind herself, "instead of an olive branch," about his knees (cf. v. 1224). —

Æsthetiken fordrede Aabenbarelse, men hjalp sig med et Tilfælde, Ethiken fordrede Aabenbarelse, og fandt i den tragiske Helt sin Tilfredsstillelse.  
Aesthetics demanded disclosure, but helped itself with a chance; ethics demanded disclosure, and found in the tragic hero its satisfaction.
> The closing antithesis restated: The summary of the whole movement: both aesthetics and ethics end by demanding «Aabenbarelse» (disclosure), but aesthetics only «hjalp sig med et Tilfælde» (helped itself with a contrived chance), whereas ethics «fandt i den tragiske Helt sin Tilfredsstillelse» (found its satisfaction in the tragic hero, who genuinely discloses). The stage is set to ask whether Abraham can be either.

Tiltrods for den Strenghed, med hvilken Ethiken fordrer Aabenbarelse, lader det sig dog ikke negte, at Hemmelighed og 'Taushed egentlig gjør et Menneske til det Store, netop fordi de ere Inderlighedens Bestemmelser.  
In spite of the severity with which ethics demands disclosure, it cannot be denied that secrecy and silence are precisely what make a man great, exactly because they are determinations of inwardness.
> «Inderlighed» — inwardness: «Inderlighed» = 'inwardness', a key Kierkegaardian term for inner, subjective depth as opposed to outward show; «Bestemmelser» here means 'determinations, defining marks'. Ethics («Ethiken») demands «Aabenbarelse» (disclosure, modern «åbenbarelse»), yet secrecy and silence are the marks of inwardness. Note period orthography: «gjør» (modern «gør») keeps the «gj», and the OCR stray apostrophe before «Taushed» is an artifact of the old edition.

Da Amor forlader Psyche siger han til hende: Du skal føde et Barn, der bliver et Gudebarn, hvis Du tier, men et Menneske, hvis Du forraader Hemmeligheden.  
When Amor leaves Psyche he says to her: You shall bear a child who will be a child of the gods, if you keep silent, but a human being, if you betray the secret.

Den tragiske Helt, der er Ethikens Yndling, han er det rene Menneske, ham kan jeg ogsaa forstaae, og alt hans Foretagende er ogsaa i det Aabenhare.  
The tragic hero, who is ethics' favorite, is the purely human being; him too I can understand, and all his undertaking is likewise in the open.
> «Den tragiske Helt» — the tragic hero: «Den tragiske Helt», 'the tragic hero', is Kierkegaard's foil to Abraham throughout the «Problemata»: he sacrifices within «det Ethiske» (the ethical) and can be understood, because his act is «i det Aabenhare» — out in the open (modern «åbenbare»; the OCR «Aabenhare» garbles the «b» of «Aabenbare»). Abraham, by contrast, is silent and unintelligible. Note «forstaae» (modern «forstå») and «ogsaa» (modern «også»).

Gaaer jeg videre, da støder jeg bestandig an paa Paradoxet, det guddommelige og det dæmoniske; thi Taushed er begge Dele.  
If I go further, I keep striking against the paradox, the divine and the demonic; for silence is both of these.
> «Paradoxet» — the paradox: «Paradoxet», 'the paradox', is the central category of «Frygt og Bæven»: the believer's silence is at once «det guddommelige» (the divine) and «det dæmoniske» (the demonic), indistinguishable from the outside. «Gaaer jeg videre» is inversion ('go I further') signalling the conditional, and «thi» = 'for, because'. Note «Gaaer» (modern «går») and «paa» (modern «på»).

Taushed er Dæmonens Besnærelse; og jo mere der ties, jo forfærdeligere bliver Dæmonen, men Taushed er ogsaa Guddommens Samvidne med den Enkelte, Inden jeg imidlertid gaaer over til Fortællingen om Abraham, vil"jeg kalde et Par poetiske Individualiteter frem.  
Silence is the demon's snare; and the more one is silent, the more terrible the demon becomes — but silence is also the deity's confidence with the single individual. Before I pass over, however, to the story of Abraham, I will summon up a couple of poetic individualities.
> Silence as God's confidence: «Samvidne» (one who knows together, a confidant) sets up the double nature of silence: it is both «Dæmonens Besnærelse» (the demon's snare) and «Guddommens Samvidne med den Enkelte» — the deity's shared secret with «den Enkelte», the single individual. The run-on here, and the stray quotation mark in «vil"jeg», are artifacts of the old edition; «gaaer» (modern «går»), «ogsaa» (modern «også»).

Ved Dialektikens Magt holder jeg dem paa Spidsen, og idet jeg svinger Fortvivlelsens Disciplin over dem, skal jeg nok forhindre dem i at staae stille, 1ot' > . u ' at de om muligen i deres Angst kunne opdage Eet og Andet”).  
By the power of dialectic I hold them on the point, and as I swing the discipline of despair over them, I shall surely keep them from standing still, so that they may possibly, in their dread, discover one thing and another.
> «Fortvivlelse» / «Angst» — despair and dread: «Fortvivlelse» = 'despair' (a central Kierkegaardian word) and «Angst» = 'dread/anxiety'; here he 'swings the discipline of despair' over his poetic figures so that in their dread they may discover something. The garble «1ot' > . u '» mid-sentence is OCR damage from the 19th-century edition, kept verbatim per the source. Note «paa» (modern «på»), «staae» (modern «stå»), and «muligen» (an older adverbial form of «muligt»).

Åristotetes fortæller i hans Politik en Historie om en politisk Urolighed i Delphi, der havde sin Grund i et Giftermaals Anliggende.  
Aristotle relates in his Politics a story of a political disturbance in Delphi that had its cause in a matter of marriage.

Brudgommen, hvem Augurerne forudsige en Ulykke, der vil have sin Oprindelse af hans Giftermaal, forandrer pludselig sin Plan i det afgjørende Øieblik, da han kommer for at hente Bruden — han vil ikke holde Bryllup.  
The bridegroom, to whom the augurs foretell a misfortune that will have its origin in his marriage, suddenly alters his plan at the decisive moment, when he comes to fetch the bride — he will not hold a wedding.
> «Augurer» — augurs: «Augurer» are the Roman/Greek augurs, priests who read the will of the gods from omens; their «Udsagn» (pronouncement) drives the whole example. «forudsige» = 'foretell'. Note period orthography: «afgjørende» (modern «afgørende») with «gj», and «Øieblik» (modern «øjeblik») with «øi» for «øj».

Mere behøver jeg ikke%").  
More than that I do not need.

I Delphi gik denne Disse Bevægelser og Stillinger kunne vel endnu blive Gjenstand for æsthetisk Behandling, hvorvidt derimod Troens og hele Troeslivet kan blive det, lader jeg her uafgjort.  
These movements and postures may well still become an object for aesthetic treatment; to what extent, by contrast, faith and the whole life of faith can become so, I leave here undecided.
> «Tro» — faith: «Tro» = 'faith', the central concern of the book; «Troeslivet» = 'the life of faith'. Kierkegaard grants that the outward 'movements and postures' can be handled aesthetically but doubts that faith itself can. The opening «I Delphi gik denne» is a dangling fragment where the old edition spliced in another passage (note «Disse» starting a new thought mid-line) — kept verbatim. «Gjenstand» (modern «genstand») keeps the «gj»; «æsthetisk» (modern «æstetisk»).

Kun vil jeg, fordi det altid er mig en Glæde at takke hvem jeg skylder Noget, takke Lessing for de enkelte Vink om et christeligt Drama, der findes i hans hamburgische Dramaturgie.  
I will only, because it is always a joy to me to thank whomever I owe something, thank Lessing for the few hints toward a Christian drama that are to be found in his Hamburgische Dramaturgie.

Han har imidlertid hæftet Blikket paa den reen guddommelige Side af dette Liv (den fuldendte Seier), derfor har han mistvivlet; maaskece vilde han have dømt anderledes, hvis han havde været mere opmærksom paa den reen menneskelige Side.  
He has, however, fixed his gaze on the purely divine side of this life (the completed victory), and therefore he has despaired; perhaps he would have judged otherwise had he paid more attention to the purely human side.
> Counterfactual conditional: «maaskee vilde han have dømt anderledes, hvis han havde været mere opmærksom» — a past counterfactual: 'he would have judged otherwise, had he been more attentive'. The pluperfect «havde været» in the «hvis»-clause pairs with the conditional perfect «vilde have dømt». Note «paa» (modern «på»), «reen» (modern «ren», doubled vowel), «Seier» (modern «sejr»); «maaskece» is an OCR slip for «maaskee» (modern «måske»).

(T'heologia viatorum).  
(Theology of the wayfarers.)
> «Theologia viatorum» — theology of the wayfarer: Latin theological term: «theologia viatorum», the 'theology of those on the way' — the knowledge of God available to humans still journeying toward God, as opposed to «theologia beatorum», the theology of the blessed who already see God. The 'purely human side' Lessing neglected is this wayfarer's standpoint. The OCR stray apostrophe in «T'heologia» is an edition artifact.

Det, han siger, er unegtelig meget kort, tildeels undvigende, men da jeg altid er saare glad. naar jeg kan faae Leilighed til at tage Lessing med, tager jeg ham strax.  
What he says is admittedly very brief, partly evasive, but since I am always exceedingly glad when I can get an occasion to bring Lessing in, I take him at once.
> «saare» — exceedingly: «saare» is an archaic intensifier, 'very, exceedingly' (modern «såre» in this sense is no longer common). The stray period in «saare glad. naar» and the lowercase «naar» that follows are OCR artifacts of the old edition, kept verbatim. Note «unegtelig» (modern «unægtelig»), «tildeels» (modern «tildels»), «faae» (modern «få»), «Leilighed» (modern «lejlighed»).

Lessing var ikke blot et af de mest omfattende Hoveder, Tydskland har eiet; han var ikke blot i Besiddelse af en ganske sjelden Prompthed i sin Viden, der gjør, at man trygt kan stole paa ham og hans Autopsi uden at frygte for at blive narret ved løse Citater, som intetsteds have hjemme, halvforstaaede Phraser, der ere hentede fra upaalidelige Compendier, eller desorienteret ved en dum Udbasunen af Nyheder, som de Ældre have fremsat langt bedre — men han havde tillige en høist ualmindelig Gave til at forklare, hvad han selv har forstaaet.  
Lessing was not merely one of the most comprehensive minds Germany has possessed; he was not merely in possession of a quite rare promptness in his knowledge, which makes it possible to rely on him and his autopsy with confidence, without fearing to be duped by loose citations that belong nowhere, half-understood phrases drawn from unreliable compendia, or disoriented by a stupid trumpeting of novelties that the ancients had set forth far better — but he also possessed a most uncommon gift for explaining what he himself had understood.
> «Autopsi» — seeing for oneself: «Autopsi» here keeps its Greek root sense, 'seeing with one's own eyes, first-hand inspection' of the sources — not the modern medical meaning. Kierkegaard praises Lessing's reliability: one need not fear «løse Citater» (loose citations) or «halvforstaaede Phraser» (half-understood phrases). Note «Tydskland» (modern «Tyskland»), «eiet» (modern «ejet»), «sjelden» (modern «sjælden»), «gjør» (modern «gør»), «upaalidelige» (modern «upålidelige»).
> «ikke blot … men» — not merely … but also: The sentence is built on a long «ikke blot … ikke blot … men tillige» frame — 'not merely … not merely … but also' — that suspends the main praise («en … Gave til at forklare», a gift for explaining) until the very end, after a heap of subordinate clauses. This deferral is characteristic of Kierkegaard's periodic style. «forstaaet» (modern «forstået»), «høist» (modern «højst»).

Derved blev har staaende, i vor Tid gaaer man videre, og forklarer mere end man selv har forstaaet.  
There he stopped; in our age one goes further, and explains more than one has oneself understood.
> «gaae videre» — to go further: «at gaae videre», 'to go further', is a running ironic refrain in «Frygt og Bæven» against an age that claims to have surpassed faith and gone 'beyond' it. Lessing honestly stopped at what he understood; 'in our age one goes further, and explains more than one has understood'. The OCR «blev har staaende» should read «blev han staaende» (he remained standing/stopped). Note «gaaer» (modern «går»).

Den historiske Katastrophe var efter Aristoteles følgende: for at hævne sig skaffer Familien et Tempel-Kar ind blandt hans Huusgeraad, og han bliver dømt som TempelNaet Begivenhed neppe af uden Taarer; hvis en Digter vilde adoptere den, da turde han vel nok regne paa Deeltagelse.  
The historical catastrophe, according to Aristotle, was as follows: to take revenge, the family smuggles a temple vessel in among his household goods, and he is condemned as a temple-robber — an event hardly to be told without tears; if a poet would adopt it, he might well count on sympathy.
> Condemned as a temple-robber: The revenge plot: the slighted family plants «et Tempel-Kar» (a temple vessel) among the bridegroom's «Huusgeraad» (household goods, modern «husgeråd») so that he is condemned as a «Tempelrøver» (temple-robber, a capital impiety). The old edition has run a second fragment into this line — «som TempelNaet Begivenhed neppe af uden Taarer» splices the catastrophe sentence into a separate remark about a poet adopting the story — kept verbatim. «Taarer» (modern «tårer»), «Deeltagelse» (modern «deltagelse»).

Er det ikke forfærdeligt, at Kjærligheden, der ofte nok var landflygtig i Livet, nu ogsaa er berøvet Himlens Bistand?  
Is it not dreadful that love, which has often enough been an exile in life, is now also deprived of heaven's aid?
> «Kjærlighed» — love: «Kjærlighed» = 'love' (modern «kærlighed»), keeping the period «kj». The pathos here: usually it is the trials of finitude that exile lovers, but here it is heaven itself that withdraws its «Bistand» (aid) — the augur's prophecy turns the gods against the marriage. «landflygtig» = 'exiled, banished'; «ogsaa» (modern «også»).

Er det gamle Ord, at Ægteskabet stiftes i Himlen, her ikke til Skamme?  
Is the old saying, that marriage is made in heaven, not here put to shame?

&Fllers er det alle Endelighedens Trængsler og Vanskeligheder, der svm onde Aander ville adskille de Elskende, men Kjærligheden har Himlen paa sin Side, og derfor beseirer denne hellige Alliance alle Fjender.  
Otherwise it is all the tribulations and difficulties of finitude that, like evil spirits, would part the lovers, but love has heaven on its side, and therefore this holy alliance vanquishes all foes.
> «Endelighed» — finitude: «Endelighed» = 'finitude', the realm of the finite and temporal, set against «det Uendelige» (the infinite) in Kierkegaard's vocabulary. Normally love's enemies are 'all the tribulations of finitude' acting «svm onde Aander» (like evil spirits) — but love has heaven on its side and wins. «&Fllers» is OCR damage for «Ellers» (otherwise), and «svm» for «som»; «Aander» (modern «ånder»), «beseirer» (modern «besejrer»).

Her er det Himlen selv, der adskiller hvad Himlen selv jo dog har forenet.  
Here it is heaven itself that parts what heaven itself has, after all, joined together.

Hvo havde ogsaa anet dette?  
And who could have suspected this?
> «Hvo» — who (archaic): «Hvo» is the archaic nominative interrogative/relative pronoun 'who', already old-fashioned in 1843 and surviving in proverbs (e.g. «Hvo intet vover, intet vinder»). Modern Danish uses «hvem». «anet» is the past participle of «ane», to suspect or sense; «ogsaa» (modern «også»).

mindst vel den unge Brud.  
least of all, surely, the young bride.

Endnu for et Øieblik siden sad hun paa sit Værelse i al sin Skjønhed, og de elskelige Piger havde samvittighedsfuldt smykket hende, saa de kunde forsvare det for al Verden, saa de ikke blot havde Glæde deraf men Misundelse, ja Glæde ved, at det var umuligt for dem at blive mere misundelige, fordi det var umuligt for hende at være skjønnere.  
Only a moment ago she sat in her room in all her beauty, and the lovely girls had conscientiously adorned her, so that they could answer for it before all the world, so that they not only took joy in it but envy — yes, joy that it was impossible for them to grow more envious, because it was impossible for her to be more beautiful.
> «Skjønhed» — beauty: «Skjønhed» = 'beauty' (modern «skønhed»), and «skjønnere» = 'more beautiful', both keeping the period «skj». The lyrical conceit: the girls' joy and envy reach a limit because the bride's beauty cannot be surpassed. Note «Øieblik» (modern «øjeblik»), «paa» (modern «på»), «Værelse» (room), «Glæde» (joy).

Hun sad ene paa sit Værelse og blev forvandlet fra Skjønhed til Skjønhed; thi Alt hvad qvindelig Kunst formaaede, det var benyttet til værdeligen at smykke den Værdige, men der manglede dog endnu Noget, som de unge Piger ikke havde drømt om: et Slør, finere, lettere og dog mere skjulende end det, i hvilket de unge Piger havde indhyllet hende; en Brudeklædning, som ingen ung Pige vidste Beskeed om, eller kunde være hende behjælpelig røver.  
She sat alone in her room and was transfigured from beauty to beauty; for all that womanly art could do had been used worthily to adorn the worthy one, but something was still lacking that the young girls had not dreamed of: a veil, finer, lighter, and yet more concealing than the one in which the young girls had wrapped her; a bridal gown that no young girl knew anything about, or could help her with.
> «qvindelig» — womanly: «qvindelig» = 'womanly, feminine' (modern «kvindelig»), where «qv» writes the «kv» sound — a period spelling like «beqvem». The veil and bridal gown 'finer, lighter, yet more concealing' point to an invisible, sacred adornment beyond any human art. The OCR has spliced a stray «røver» (robber) onto the end from the temple-robber passage; «værdeligen» is an archaic adverb 'worthily', «skjulende» (concealing) keeps the «skj».

Dette er imidlertid ligegyldigt; thi Spørgsmaalet er ikke, om Familien er snild eller dum i at tage Hævn, Familien faaer kun ideal Betydning forsaavidt den drages ind i Heltens Dialektik.  
This, however, is a matter of indifference; for the question is not whether the family is clever or stupid in taking revenge — the family gains ideal significance only insofar as it is drawn into the hero's dialectic.
> Ideal significance in the hero's dialectic: Kierkegaard sets aside the realism of the plot: the family's cleverness is «ligegyldigt» (a matter of indifference). What matters is the «ideal Betydning», the ideal or conceptual significance, that the family acquires only as it is drawn into «Heltens Dialektik» — the dialectical movement of the hero's situation. «Spørgsmaalet» (modern «spørgsmålet»), «faaer» (modern «får»), «forsaavidt» (modern «forså vidt»).

Forøvrigt er det skjæbnesvangert nok, at han, idet han vil undflye Faren ved ikke at gifte sig, styrter i den, samt at hans Liv paa en dobbelt Maade kommer i Berøring med det Guddommelige, først ved Augurens Udsagn, dernæst ved at blive dømt som Tempelrøver.  
For the rest, it is fateful enough that he, in seeking to flee the danger by not marrying, plunges into it, and that his life comes into contact with the divine in a twofold way: first through the augur's pronouncement, then through being condemned as a temple-robber.
> «skjæbnesvanger» — fateful: «skjæbnesvanger» = 'fraught with fate, fateful' (from «Skjæbne», fate, modern «skæbne»), keeping the period «skj». The irony Kierkegaard draws out: by fleeing the predicted danger the bridegroom 'plunges into it' («styrter i den»), and his life touches «det Guddommelige» (the divine) twice over. «Forøvrigt» (modern «for øvrigt»), «paa en dobbelt Maade» (modern «på en dobbelt måde»).

med, ja Bruden havde end ikke Forstand til at hjælpe sig selv.  
with — indeed, the bride did not even have the understanding to help herself.

Det var en usynlig, en venlig Magt, der har sin Glæde af at pynte en Brud, der indhyllede hende i den, uden at hun vidste Noget deraf; thi hun saae blot, hvorledes Brudgommen gik forbi og gik op til Templet.  
It was an invisible, a kindly power, which takes its joy in adorning a bride, that wrapped her in it without her knowing anything of it; for she only saw how the bridegroom passed by and went up to the temple.
> «saae» — saw (doubled vowel): «saae» is the past tense of «see» (to see), modern «så», with the period doubled vowel «aae». The invisible 'kindly power' continues the veil imagery from s25, wrapping the bride in a bridal garment she does not see while the bridegroom slips past to the temple. «hvorledes» = 'how', «thi» = 'for'.

Hun saae Døren lukke sig efter ham, og hun blev end roligere og saligere; thi hun vidste, at han nu tilhørte hende mere end nogensinde.  
She saw the door close behind him, and she grew yet calmer and more blissful; for she knew that he now belonged to her more than ever.
> «salig» — blessed, blissful: «salig» = 'blessed, blissful' (with religious overtones of beatitude), here in the comparative «saligere», 'more blissful'. The dramatic irony is acute: she grows calmer and 'more blissful', certain he belongs to her, precisely as he is abandoning the wedding. «thi» = 'for'; «nogensinde» = 'ever'.

Templets Dør gik op, han traadte ud, men hun slog jomfrueligt Øiet ned og derfor saae hun ikke, at hans AÅasyn var forvirret, men han saae, at Himlen nok var misundelig paa Brudens Deilighed og paa hans Lykke.  
The temple door opened, he stepped out, but she lowered her eyes maidenly and therefore did not see that his countenance was distraught, while he saw that heaven was indeed envious of the bride's loveliness and of his happiness.
> «Aasyn» — countenance: «Aasyn» = 'countenance, visage' (modern «åsyn»), an elevated, biblical word for the face; here the OCR has garbled it as «AÅasyn». «jomfrueligt» = 'maidenly, virginally' (from «Jomfru», maiden). The mirrored seeing — she lowers her eyes and does not see his distress; he sees heaven's envy — is the pivot of the scene. «Øiet» (modern «øjet»), «Deilighed» (modern «dejlighed»), «paa» (modern «på»).

Templets Dør gik op, de unge Piger saae Brudgommen træde ud; men de saae ikke, at hans Aasyn var forvirret; thi de havde travlt med at hente Bruden.  
The temple door opened, the young girls saw the bridegroom step out; but they did not see that his countenance was distraught, for they were busy fetching the bride.

Da traadte hun frem i al sin jomfruelige Ydmyghed og dog som en Herskerinde, omgiven af sin Stab af unge Piger, der neiede sig for hende, som den unge Pige altid neier sig for en Brud.  
Then she stepped forth in all her maidenly humility and yet as a sovereign, surrounded by her retinue of young girls who curtsied to her, as the young girl always curtsies to a bride.
> «neie sig» — to curtsy: «at neie sig» = 'to curtsy, to bow' (modern «neje sig»). The bride steps forth «i al sin jomfruelige Ydmyghed» (in all her maidenly humility) 'and yet as a sovereign' («som en Herskerinde») — the same paradoxical mix of humility and majesty Kierkegaard prizes. «omgiven» = 'surrounded', «Stab» here = 'retinue'.

Saaledes stod hun i Spidsen af den skjønne Skare og ventede — det var kun et Øseblik; thi Templet var strax derved — og Brudgommen kom — men han gik hendes Dør forbi.  
Thus she stood at the head of the lovely throng and waited — it was only a moment, for the temple was right beside it — and the bridegroom came — but he passed her door by.
> «Skare» — throng: «Skare» = 'throng, company', here «den skjønne Skare» (the lovely throng) of bridesmaids. The dashes stage the suspense to the blow of the final clause, «men han gik hendes Dør forbi» — 'but he passed her door by'. «Saaledes» (modern «således»), «skjønne» keeps the «skj»; «Øseblik» is an OCR slip for «Øieblik» (moment, modern «øjeblik»).

Dog jeg afbryder her; jeg er ikke Digter og gaaer blot dialektisk tilværks.  
But I break off here; I am not a poet and proceed only dialectically.
> «gaae dialektisk tilværks»: «at gaae tilværks» = 'to set about it, to proceed' (modern «at gå til værks»); «dialektisk» here means analyzing the situation through its conceptual oppositions rather than narrating it poetically. Johannes de silentio disclaims the poet's role — «jeg er ikke Digter» — to take up the dialectician's. Note «gaaer» (modern «går»).

For det første er at bemærke, at det er i det afgjørende Øieblik, at Helten faaer hiin Oplysning, han er da reen og angerløs, har ikke letsindig knyttet sig til den Elskede.  
First it is to be noted that it is at the decisive moment that the hero receives that information; he is then pure and free of guilt, having not lightly bound himself to the beloved.
> «hiin» — that, yonder: «hiin» is an archaic distal demonstrative, 'that (one over there), yonder' — modern Danish uses «den» — pointing to the augur's revelation already mentioned. «reen og angerløs» = 'pure and free of guilt' («anger» = remorse), establishing the hero's innocence at the decisive moment. «afgjørende» (modern «afgørende»), «Øieblik» (modern «øjeblik»), «faaer» (modern «får»), «reen» (modern «ren»).

Dernæst har han et guddommeligt Udsagn for sig eller rettere imod sig, han styres da ikke som hine spinkle Elskere og Elskerinder af Selvkløgt.  
Next, he has a divine pronouncement for him, or rather against him; he is then not governed, like those flimsy lovers and mistresses, by self-conceit.
> «Selvkløgt» — self-conceit: «Selvkløgt» = 'self-cleverness, self-conceit' (from «klog», wise/clever), the trait of the «spinkle Elskere» (flimsy, slight lovers) who manage their love by their own shrewdness. The hero, by contrast, is bound by «et guddommeligt Udsagn» (a divine pronouncement) — «for sig eller rettere imod sig», for him or rather against him. «hine» = 'those' (distal plural).

Det følger fremdeles af sig selv, at hiint Udsagn gjør ham ligesaa ulykkelig som Bruden, ja lidt til, da han dog er Anledningen.  
It follows further as a matter of course that that pronouncement makes him just as unhappy as the bride — indeed, a little more so, since he is, after all, the occasion of it.
> «hiint» — that (neuter): «hiint» is the neuter form of the archaic demonstrative «hiin» (that, yonder), agreeing with the neuter noun «Udsagn» (pronouncement). «gjør» = 'makes' (modern «gør», period «gj»); «ligesaa … som» = 'just as … as'. He is «Anledningen», the occasion or cause, which makes his lot slightly heavier than the bride's.

Vel er det nemlig sandt, at Augurerne kun forudsagde ham en Ulykke, men Spørgsmaalet er, om denne Ulykke ikke er af den Beskaffenhed, at den ved at ramme ham tillige vil ramme deres ægteskabelige Lykke.  
For it is indeed true that the augurs foretold a misfortune only for him, but the question is whether this misfortune is not of such a nature that, in striking him, it will also strike their married happiness.
> «Vel … men» — concessive frame: «Vel er det nemlig sandt … men …» = 'It is indeed true … but …', a concessive frame that grants a point in order to qualify it. The dialectical knot Kierkegaard is tightening: the misfortune was foretold for him alone, yet «af den Beskaffenhed» (of such a nature) that it must strike the marriage too. «Spørgsmaalet» (modern «spørgsmålet»).

Hvad skal han nu gjøre?  
What is he now to do?

1) Skal han tie og holde Bryllup, og tænke, Ulykken kommer maaskee ikke strax, i ethvert Fald har jeg hævdet Kjærligheden og ikke frygtet for at gjøre mig selv ulykkelig; men tie maa jeg, thi ellers er selv det korte Øieblik forspildt.  
1) Shall he keep silent and hold the wedding, and think: the misfortune may perhaps not come at once; in any case I have upheld love and not been afraid to make myself unhappy — but silent I must be, for otherwise even the short moment is squandered.
> «tie maa jeg» — inverted emphasis: «tie maa jeg» fronts the verb «tie» (to be silent) before subject and modal — 'silent I must be' — for emphasis, a word order Kierkegaard favors at the pitch of feeling. «tie» (to keep silent) is the verb on which the whole Problema turns. Note «gjøre» (modern «gøre»), «maaskee» (modern «måske»), «Øieblik» (modern «øjeblik»), «forspildt» = 'squandered, wasted'.

Dette synes plausibelt, men er det ingenlunde; thi i saa Fald har han fornærmet Pigen.  
This seems plausible, but is by no means so; for in that case he has wronged the girl.

Han har ved sin Taushed paa en Maade gjort Pigen skyldig; thi dersom hun havde vidst det, havde hun vel aldrig givet sit Samtykke til en saadan Forbindelse.  
By his silence he has in a way made the girl guilty; for had she known it, she would surely never have given her consent to such a union.
> «dersom» — counterfactual conditional: «dersom» = 'if' (a more formal conditional than «hvis»); «dersom hun havde vidst det, havde hun vel aldrig …» is a past counterfactual — 'had she known it, she would never have …' — with the conditional clause's verb fronted in the main clause («havde hun»). His «Taushed» (silence) is what makes her unwittingly «skyldig» (guilty). «paa en Maade» (modern «på en måde»).

Han vil da i Nødens Stund ikke blot have Ulykken at. bære paa, men ogsaa det Ansvar, at han har tiet, hendes retfærdige Vrede at han har tiet.  
In the hour of need he will then have not only the misfortune to bear, but also the responsibility of having kept silent — her righteous anger that he kept silent.
> «Ansvar» — responsibility: «Ansvar» = 'responsibility, accountability'. Silence brings a double burden: not only «Ulykken» (the misfortune) but the «Ansvar» of having concealed it, and the girl's «retfærdige Vrede» (righteous anger). The stray period in «Ulykken at. bære paa» is an OCR artifact of the old edition. «ogsaa» (modern «også»), «tiet» = past participle of «tie», to keep silent.

2) Skal han tie og lade være at holde Bryllup?  
2) Shall he keep silent and refrain from holding the wedding?

1 saa Fald maa han gaae ind i en Mystification, hvorved han tilintetgjør sig selv i sit Forhold til hende.  
In that case he must enter into a mystification whereby he annihilates himself in his relation to her.
> «tilintetgjøre» — to annihilate: «tilintetgjøre» = 'to annihilate, reduce to nothing' (modern «tilintetgøre», period «gj»). By feigning a change of heart he must «gaae ind i en Mystification» (enter into a mystification, a deception) that destroys his true standing «i sit Forhold til hende» (in his relation to her). The OCR «1 saa Fald» should read «I saa Fald», 'in that case'. «gaae» (modern «gå»).

Dette vilde maaskee Æsthetiken billige.  
This, perhaps, aesthetics would approve.
> «Æsthetik» — aesthetics: «Æsthetiken» (modern «æstetikken») is 'aesthetics' as a stage and standpoint of life in Kierkegaard, set against «Ethiken» (the ethical); «billige» = 'to approve, sanction'. Aesthetics would approve the noble self-concealment that ethics condemns — the recurring clash this passage stages. The verb-final «billige» in inversion fronts the object 'this'.

Katastrophen kunde da dannes i Lighed med den virkelige, kun at det i det sidste Øieblik kom til en Forklaring, der dog var bag efter, da det, æsthetisk tænkt, bliver en Nødvendighed, at lade ham døe, med mindre denne Videnskab skulde see sig istand til at hæve hiin uheldsvangre Propheti.  
The catastrophe could then be formed in likeness to the real one, only that at the last moment it came to an explanation, which was however too late, since, aesthetically considered, it becomes a necessity to let him die — unless this science should find itself able to lift that ill-omened prophecy.
> «uheldsvanger Propheti» — ill-omened prophecy: «uheldsvanger» = 'fraught with misfortune, ill-omened' (parallel to «skjæbnesvanger», fateful, in s27); «Propheti» = 'prophecy' (modern «profeti»). Aesthetics («denne Videnskab», this science) would have to either let the hero die or annul «hiin … Propheti», that prophecy — the augur's word. «hiin» again the archaic 'that, yonder'. Note «Øieblik» (modern «øjeblik»), «see» (modern «se», doubled vowel), «døe» (modern «dø»).

Imidlertid indeholder denne Adfærd, hvor høimodig den end er, en Fornærmelse mod Pigen og Realiteten af hendes Kjærlighed.  
Meanwhile this conduct, however magnanimous it may be, contains an affront to the girl and to the reality of her love.
> «høimodig» — magnanimous: «høimodig» = 'high-minded, magnanimous, noble' (modern «højmodig»), keeping «øi» for «øj»; the related noun «Høimod» (magnanimity) recurs later in this section. «hvor … end» = 'however …, no matter how …'. Even the noblest self-sacrifice still «indeholder … en Fornærmelse» (contains an affront) to the girl and «Realiteten af hendes Kjærlighed» (the reality of her love). «Kjærlighed» keeps the «kj».

3) Skal han tale?  
3) Shall he speak?

Man maa naturligviis ikke glemme, at vor Helt er lidt for poetisk til at det at give Afkald paa sin Kjærlighed for ham ikke skulde have anden Betydning end en mislykket Handelsspekulation.  
One must of course not forget that our hero is a little too poetic for renouncing his love to have for him no other significance than a failed commercial speculation.
> «give Afkald paa» — to renounce: «at give Afkald paa» = 'to renounce, give up' (modern «at give afkald på»); to renounce one's love is no mere «mislykket Handelsspekulation» (failed commercial speculation) for one too «poetisk» to treat the heart as a ledger. The contrast with cold calculation prepares the move toward «Resignation», the knight's infinite renunciation. «naturligviis» (modern «naturligvis»), «Kjærlighed» keeps the «kj».

Taler han, saa bliver det Hele en ulykkelig Kjærlighedshistorie i samme Stiil som Axel og Valborg”).  
If he speaks, then the whole thing becomes an unhappy love story in the same style as Axel and Valborg.

Det bliver et Par, som Himlen selv +) Forøvrigt kunde man fra dette Punkt komme id i en anden Retning af dialektiske Bevægelser.  
They become a couple whom heaven itself — For the rest, from this point one could enter another direction of dialectical movements.

Himlen forudsiger ham en Ulykke af hans Ægteskab, saa kunde han jo lade være at holde Bryllup, -men derfor ikke opgive Pigen, men leve i en romantisk Forbindelse med hende, der for de Elskende var mere end betryggende.  
Heaven foretells him a misfortune from his marriage; so he might refrain from holding the wedding — but not therefore give up the girl, and instead live in a romantic union with her, which for the lovers was more than reassuring.

Dette indeholder dog en Fornærmelse mod Pigen, fordi han i sin Kjærlighed. til hende ikke udtrykker det Almene.  
This, however, contains an affront to the girl, because in his love for her he does not express the universal.
> «det Almene» — the universal: «det Almene» = 'the universal', Kierkegaard's term (drawn from Hegel) for the ethical order in which the individual is intelligible and which marriage publicly expresses. To love the girl in a private 'romantic union' that evades marriage is to fail to «udtrykke det Almene» (express the universal), hence an affront. The stray period in «Kjærlighed. til» is an OCR artifact; «Kjærlighed» keeps the «kj».

adskiller.  
parts them.

Dog bliver denne Adskillelse i nærværeride Tilfælde at tænke noget anderledes, da den tillige resulterer af Individernes frie Gjerning.  
Yet this separation must, in the present case, be thought somewhat differently, since it also results from the individuals' free act.
> «Gjerning» — deed, act: «Gjerning» = 'deed, work, act' (modern «gerning», period «gj»). The 'separation' («Adskillelse») here differs from Axel and Valborg's: it «resulterer af Individernes frie Gjerning» — results also from the free act of the individuals themselves, not from heaven alone. «nærværeride» is an OCR slip for «nærværende» (present); «anderledes» = 'otherwise, differently'.

Det saare Difficile ved det Dialektiske i denne Sag er nemlig, at "Ulykken kun skal ramme ham.  
For the exceedingly difficult thing about the dialectical element in this matter is that the misfortune is to strike only him.
> «saare Difficile» — exceedingly difficult: «saare» = 'exceedingly' (the archaic intensifier from s14), and «Difficile» is the French/Latinate loan 'difficult' — Kierkegaard sprinkles such learned foreign words through this section. The peculiar difficulty: «Ulykken kun skal ramme ham», the misfortune is to strike only him, so the lovers cannot share a common fate (unlike Axel and Valborg). The OCR stray quotation mark before «Ulykken» is an artifact.

De faae da ikke som Axel og Valborg et fælles Udtryk for deres Lidelse, medens Himlen ligemeget adskiller Axel og Valborg, fordi de ere hinanden lige nær.  
They do not, then, like Axel and Valborg, get a common expression for their suffering, whereas heaven separates Axel and Valborg all the same, because they are equally near to each other.
> A common expression of suffering: Axel and Valborg suffer together and so have «et fælles Udtryk for deres Lidelse», a common expression of their suffering; our bridegroom and bride do not, since the misfortune is his alone. «ligemeget» here = 'all the same, equally'; «de ere hinanden lige nær» = 'they are equally near to one another' — the kinship that bars Axel and Valborg falls on both alike. «faae» (modern «få»).

Var dette Tilfælde her, saa lod der sig tænke en Udvei.  
Were this the case here, a way out could be conceived.
> Verb-first counterfactual: «Var dette Tilfælde her, saa …» opens with the verb «Var» (were) instead of «hvis» — a verb-first counterfactual conditional, 'were this the case … then …'. «lod der sig tænke en Udvei» is an impersonal reflexive, 'a way out could be thought / conceived' («Udvei» = way out, modern «udvej»).

Da Himlen nemlig ikke bruger nogen synlig Magt for at adskille dem, men overlader det til dem selv, saa lod det sig jo tænke, at de besluttede i Forening at trodse Himlen med samt dens Ulykke.  
For since heaven uses no visible power to part them, but leaves it to themselves, one could indeed conceive that they decided in union to defy heaven together with its misfortune.
> «i Forening» — in union, jointly: «i Forening» = 'jointly, in union, together'; «at trodse Himlen» = 'to defy heaven'. Since heaven uses no «synlig Magt» (visible power) but leaves the choice to them, the lovers might 'jointly defy heaven' — the free act that distinguishes this case. «med samt» = 'together with'; the «Da … nemlig … saa …» frame is causal ('since … therefore'). «lod det sig … tænke» = impersonal 'it could be thought'.

Ethiken vil imidlertid fordre af ham, at han skal en re eee en rer Imidlertid var det en Opgave baade for en Digter og for en Ethiker, der vil forsvare Ægteskabet.  
Ethics, however, will demand of him that he shall — Meanwhile it was a task both for a poet and for an ethicist who would defend marriage.
> «Ethiken» — ethics; a damaged line: «Ethiken» = 'ethics' (modern «etikken»), the demand of «det Almene», the universal — set throughout against faith and the aesthetic. This line is badly damaged in the old edition: the clause «at han skal …» breaks off into OCR garble «en re eee en rer» where the verb should stand, and a new sentence «Imidlertid var det en Opgave …» runs straight on. Kept verbatim. «en Ethiker» = an ethicist; «Ægteskabet» = marriage.

Overhovedet vilde Poesien, naar den bliver opmærksom paa det Religieuse og Individualitetens Inderlighed, faae langt betydningsfuldere Opgaver end de, med hvilke den nu sysler, Atter og atler hører man jo i Poesien denne Historie; en Mand er bunden til een Pige, som han engang har elsket, eller maaskee aldrig elsket rigtig, thi nu har han seet en anden Pige. sum er Idealet.  
In general, poetry, when it becomes attentive to the religious and to the inwardness of individuality, would get far more significant tasks than those it now busies itself with. Again and again one hears, after all, this story in poetry: a man is bound to one girl whom he once loved, or perhaps never really loved, for now he has seen another girl who is the ideal.
> The religious and inwardness: Kierkegaard's program for poetry: were it attentive to «det Religieuse» (the religious) and «Individualitetens Inderlighed» (the inwardness of individuality), it would have far weightier tasks. «Inderlighed» = inwardness (see s1). The line is run together in the old edition — «sysler, Atter og atler …» splices in the next sentence; «atler» is OCR for «atter» (again), «sum» for «som» (who/which). «faae» (modern «få»), «Religieuse» (modern «religiøse»).

En Mand lager Feil i Livet, Gaden var rigtig, men det var i et forkeert Huus, thi ligeoverfor paa Zden Sal der boer Idealet — det mener man er en Opgave for Poesien.  
A man makes a mistake in life: the street was right, but it was in the wrong house, for opposite, on the second floor, there lives the ideal — that, people think, is a task for poetry.
> «tage Feil» — to be mistaken: «at tage Feil» = 'to make a mistake, be mistaken' (modern «at tage fejl»); here «lager» is an OCR slip for «tager». Kierkegaard mocks the trivial 'wrong house, right street' plots as unworthy of poetry. «forkeert» = 'wrong' (modern «forkert»), «Huus» = house (modern «hus», doubled vowel), «paa Zden Sal» = 'on the second floor' («Zden» is OCR for «2den», i.e. «anden»). «boer» = 'lives, dwells' (modern «bor»).

En Elsker har taget Feil, han har seet den Elskede ved Lys og troet hun havde mørke Haar, men see!  
A lover has made a mistake: he has seen the beloved by lamplight and believed she had dark hair, but look!
> «see» — look! (imperative): «see!» is the imperative of «see», to see — 'look!, behold!' (modern «se!»), with the period doubled vowel «ee». The mocking little anecdote: a lover thought, by lamplight, that his beloved had «mørke Haar» (dark hair). «Haar» = hair (modern «hår»); «seet» = past participle of «see» (modern «set»).

ved nærmere Eftersyn havde hun blonde — men Søsteren det er Idealet.  
on closer inspection she had blonde — but the sister, she is the ideal.

Det mener man er en Opgave for Poesien.  
That, people think, is a task for poetry.

Min Mening er, at enhver saadan Mand er en Laban, der kan være utaalelig nok i Livet, men som øieblikkelig burde pibes ud, naar han vil gjøre sig vigtig i Poesien.  
My opinion is that every such man is a Laban, who may be insufferable enough in life, but who ought to be instantly hissed off the stage when he wants to make himself important in poetry.

Kun Lidenskab mod Lidenskab giver en poetisk Collision, ikke denne Enkelthedernes Rumsteren indenfor den samme Lidenskab.  
Only passion against passion yields a poetic collision, not this rummaging of trifles within one and the same passion.
> «Lidenskab» — passion: «Lidenskab» = 'passion', for Kierkegaard the engine of genuine existence and of true drama; «en poetisk Collision» is a worthy dramatic conflict. Only «Lidenskab mod Lidenskab» (passion against passion) makes one, not «Enkelthedernes Rumsteren» — the petty 'rummaging of particulars/trifles' («Enkelthed» = a single detail) within one unchanged passion. «indenfor» = 'within' (modern «inden for»).

Naar en Pige f. Ex. i Middelalderen efter at have forelsket sig, torvisser sig om, at jordisk Kjærlighed er en Synd, og foretrækker en himinelsk, saa er her en poetisk Collision, og Pigeu er poetisk; thi hendes Liv er i Ideen.  
When a girl, for example, in the Middle Ages, after having fallen in love, convinces herself that earthly love is a sin and prefers a heavenly one, then here is a poetic collision, and the girl is poetic, for her life is in the idea.
> Earthly vs. heavenly love: A genuine 'poetic collision': passion against passion, when a medieval girl, in love, becomes convinced that «jordisk Kjærlighed» (earthly love) is a sin and prefers a «himmelsk» (heavenly) one — «hendes Liv er i Ideen», her life is in the idea. The OCR garbles several words: «torvisser» for «forvisser» (convinces), «himinelsk» for «himmelsk» (heavenly), «Pigeu» for «Pigen» (the girl). «f. Ex.» = 'for example' (Latin «exempli»); «Kjærlighed» keeps the «kj».

tabé.  
lost.

Hans Heltemod bliver da væsentlig at sætte deri, at han opgiver det æsthetiske Høimod, der dog in casu ikke let kunde tænkes at have nogen Tilsætning af den Forfængelighed, der ligger i at være skjult, da det jo maa være ham klart, at han dog gjør Pigen ulykkelig.  
His heroism then consists essentially in giving up the aesthetic magnanimity, which in this case could not easily be thought to have any admixture of the vanity that lies in being hidden, since it must surely be clear to him that he makes the girl unhappy all the same.
> «Høimod» — magnanimity; «in casu»: «Høimod» = 'magnanimity, high-mindedness' (modern «højmod», cf. «høimodig» in s49). The hero's true «Heltemod» (heroism) is to renounce «det æsthetiske Høimod», the aesthetic magnanimity of noble concealment. «in casu» is Latin, 'in this case' — another learned tag in the passage. «Forfængelighed» = vanity; «skjult» = hidden (period «skj»); «gjør» (modern «gør»).

Dette Heltemods Realitet beroer imidlertid paa, at det har havt og hævet sin Forudsætning; thi ellers kunde man især i vor Tid faae Helte nok, 1 vor Tid, der har drevet det til en mageløs Virtuoistet i det Falskneri, der gjør det Højeste derved, at man springer det Mellemliggende over.  
The reality of this heroism, however, rests on its having had and annulled its presupposition; for otherwise, especially in our age, one could find heroes enough — in our age, which has carried it to a matchless virtuosity in the forgery that achieves the highest by skipping over what lies between.
> «hæve» — to annul (a presupposition): «at hæve en Forudsætning» = to take up and annul a presupposition — having genuinely passed through and cancelled it, not skipped it. «Forudsætning» = presupposition; «havt» = 'had' (modern «haft»). The barb at 'our age': its «Falskneri» (forgery) reaches «det Højeste» (the highest) only «ved at springe det Mellemliggende over» — by skipping the intervening steps. The OCR «1 vor Tid» should read «i vor Tid»; «mageløs» = matchless, «Virtuoistet» (OCR) for «Virtuositet», «gjør» (modern «gør»).

Men hvortil nu denne Skizze, da jeg dog ikke kommer videre end til den tragiske Helt?  
But to what end now this sketch, since I get no further than the tragic hero?

Fordi det dog var muligt, at den kunde kaste et Lys over Paradoxet.  
Because it was, after all, possible that it might cast a light on the paradox.
> «Paradoxet» — the paradox: The whole sketch of the Delphic bridegroom serves only to «kaste et Lys over Paradoxet», cast light on the paradox (see s4) — the believer's silence that is at once divine and demonic. The tragic hero is examined precisely to mark, by contrast, where Abraham passes beyond him. «hvortil» = 'to what end, wherefore'; «Skizze» = sketch (modern «skitse»).

Alt beroer da paa, i hvilket Forhold han staaer til Augurernes Udsagn, der paa den ene eller anden Maade bliver afgjørende for hans Liv.  
Everything then depends on the relation in which he stands to the augurs' pronouncement, which in one way or another becomes decisive for his life.
> «Forhold» — relation: «Forhold» = 'relation, relationship', a key analytical term for Kierkegaard (the self is a relation that relates itself to itself). Everything turns on the «Forhold» of the hero to «Augurernes Udsagn», the augurs' pronouncement — whether it is public or private knowledge, the question opened next. «staaer» (modern «står»), «paa … Maade» (modern «på … måde»), «afgjørende» (modern «afgørende»).

Er dette Udsagn publici juris eller er det et Privatissimum?  
Is this pronouncement publici juris, or is it a privatissimum?
> «publici juris» / «privatissimum»: Two Latin legal/academic tags Kierkegaard opposes: «publici juris», 'of public right', belonging to everyone, publicly known; and «privatissimum», 'a most private thing', known to and concerning one person alone (in the universities, a private lecture for a single student). The augur's word is the former — intelligible to all — which is just why the Greek hero is no Abraham. Kept in the original Latin, as in the source.

Scenen er i Grækenland; en Augurs Udsagn er forstaaeligt for Alle, jeg mener ikke blot, at den Enkelte lexicalsk kan forstaae Indholdet, men den Enkelte kan forstaae, at en Augur forkynder den Enkelte Himlens Beslutning.  
The scene is in Greece; an augur's pronouncement is intelligible to all — I mean not merely that the single individual can understand its content lexically, but that the single individual can understand that an augur proclaims to the single individual heaven's decision.
> «den Enkelte» — the single individual: «den Enkelte» = 'the single individual', Kierkegaard's signature category (the one who stands alone before God). The decisive contrast with Abraham: in Greece the augur's word is «forstaaeligt for Alle», intelligible to everyone — anyone can grasp that an augur announces «Himlens Beslutning» (heaven's decision). Abraham's command, by contrast, is intelligible to no one. «lexicalsk» = 'lexically, word for word'; «forstaae» (modern «forstå»).

Augurens Udsagn er da, ikke blot forstaaeligt for Helten, men for Alle, og der resulterer intet privat Forhold til Guddommen deraf.  
The augur's pronouncement, then, is intelligible not only to the hero but to all, and no private relation to the deity results from it.
> No private relation to the deity: Because the augur's word is public, «der resulterer intet privat Forhold til Guddommen» — no private relation to «Guddommen», the deity, arises. This is exactly what Abraham has and the Greek hero lacks: «et absolut Forhold til det Absolute», an absolute relation to the absolute. «ikke blot … men» = 'not only … but'; «forstaaeligt» (modern «forståeligt»).

Han kan gjøre hvad han vil, hvad der er forudsagt vil skee, og han kommer hverken ved at gjøre eller ved at lade i engere Forhold til Guddommen, bliver hverken Gjenstand for dens Naade eller for dens Vrede.  
He can do what he will; what has been foretold will come to pass, and neither by doing nor by leaving undone does he come into a closer relation to the deity, becomes neither an object of its grace nor of its wrath.
> «hverken … eller» — neither doing nor leaving: «hverken ved at gjøre eller ved at lade» = 'neither by doing nor by leaving (undone)' — the «hverken … eller» (neither … nor) construction makes the point that the hero's action is irrelevant to a fixed fate. He becomes neither object of «Naade» (grace) nor of «Vrede» (wrath). «gjøre» (modern «gøre»), «skee» (modern «ske», doubled vowel), «engere» = 'closer' (comparative of «enge»/«snæver»), «Gjenstand» (modern «genstand»), «Naade» (modern «nåde»).

Udfaldet vil enhver Enkelt ligesaa godt kunne forstaae som Helten, og der bliver ingen hemmelig Skrift, som kun er læselig for Helten.  
The outcome every single individual will be able to understand just as well as the hero, and there is no secret writing that is legible only to the hero.
> No secret writing: «ingen hemmelig Skrift, som kun er læselig for Helten» — no secret writing legible only to the hero. The image sharpens the contrast with Abraham, whose situation is precisely an undecipherable script no one else can read. «Udfaldet» = the outcome; «enhver Enkelt» = every single individual; «ligesaa godt … som» = 'just as well as'; «forstaae» (modern «forstå»), «læselig» = legible.

Forsaavidt han da vil tale, kan han ypperlig, thi han kan gjøre sig forstaaelig; forsaavidt han vil tie, er det, fordi han i Kraft af at være den Enkelte vil være højere end det Almene, vil foregøgle sig selv allehaande phantastiske Forestillinger om, hvorledes hun snart vil glemme denne Sag o. s. v.  
Insofar, then, as he wishes to speak, he can do so excellently, for he can make himself intelligible; insofar as he wishes to keep silent, it is because, by virtue of being the single individual, he wants to be higher than the universal — wants to delude himself with all sorts of fantastical notions about how she will soon forget this whole matter, and so on.
> Higher than the universal: The crux: this hero could speak and be understood, so if he keeps silent it is only because he «vil være højere end det Almene», wants to be higher than the universal, «i Kraft af at være den Enkelte», by virtue of being the single individual — but without the divine warrant Abraham has, so it is mere self-delusion («foregøgle sig selv … phantastiske Forestillinger»). «Forsaavidt» (modern «for så vidt»), «ypperlig» = excellently, «o. s. v.» = «og så videre», 'and so forth'.

Dersom derimod Himlens Villie ikke var bleven ham forkyndt ved en Augur, dersom den aldeles privat var kommen ham til Kundskab, dersom den havde sat sig i et aldeles privat Forhold til ham, saa ere vi ved Paradoxet, dersom det ellers er til (thi min Overveielse er dilemmatisk), da kunde han ikke tale, om han end nok saa gjerne vilde.  
If, on the other hand, the will of Heaven had not been announced to him by an augur, if it had come to his knowledge in an entirely private way, if it had set itself in an entirely private relation to him, then we are at the paradox — if indeed there is one (for my deliberation is dilemmatic) — for then he could not speak, however gladly he might wish to.
> Paradoxet — the paradox: «Paradoxet» (the paradox) is the central concept of «Frygt og Bæven»: the single individual standing, by faith, in an absolute relation to the absolute, beyond the reach of the ethical/universal. Note the rising anaphora «dersom … dersom … dersom» (if … if … if), Kierkegaard's signature stacking of conditions, and the period spelling «Villie» (modern «vilje», will).

Han nød da ikke sig selv i Tausheden, men han leed Smerten, men denne var ham netop Forvisningen om, at han var berettiget.  
He did not then enjoy himself in his silence, but he suffered the pain; yet this pain was to him precisely the assurance that he was justified.

Hans Taushed havde da ikke sin Grund i, at han som den Enkelte vilde stille sig i et absolut Forhold til det Almene, men at han som den Enkelte var sal i et absolut Forhold til det Absolute.  
His silence had its ground, then, not in his wishing as the single individual to place himself in an absolute relation to the universal, but in his being, as the single individual, set in an absolute relation to the absolute.
> den Enkelte — the single individual: «den Enkelte» (the single individual) versus «det Almene» (the universal) and «det Absolute» (the absolute) is the core opposition of the book. Faith is the single individual's absolute relation to the absolute, which the ethical/universal cannot account for. («sal» here is likely an OCR slip for «sat», 'placed/set'.)

Han vilde da ogsaa kunne finde Hvile deri, efter hvad jeg kan forestille mig, medens hans høimodige Taushed bestandig vilde uroliges af det Ethiskes Fordringer.  
He would then also be able to find rest in it, as far as I can imagine, whereas his high-minded silence would constantly be disquieted by the demands of the ethical.
> det Ethiske — the ethical: «det Ethiske» (the ethical), the realm of «det Almene» (the universal), makes its «Fordringer» (demands) on everyone alike. Note the period spelling with «th» («Ethiske», «Æsthetiken») and capitalized abstract Nouns, and «høimodige» (high-minded; modern «højmodige»).

Det var overhovedet at ønske, om Æsthetiken engang vilde forsøge at begynde, hvor den i saa mange Aar har endt, ved den illusoriske Høimodighed.  
It were altogether to be wished that aesthetics would for once try to begin where for so many years it has ended, with that illusory high-mindedness.
> Æsthetiken — aesthetics: «Æsthetiken» (aesthetics) is, in Kierkegaard, a whole stage or sphere of existence, not just art-theory — the realm of immediacy and the 'interesting', set against «det Ethiske» (the ethical) and «det Religieuse» (the religious). The period orthography keeps the Greek-Latin «th» and «æ».
> «vilde» — would (past subjunctive): «vilde» is the period spelling of «ville» (would), the past form used here for the unreal/hypothetical: «om Æsthetiken … vilde forsøge» — 'if aesthetics would try'. Such conditional «vilde … vilde» pairs run all through this passage.

Saasnart den gjorde dette, vilde den arbeide lige i Haanden paa det Religieuse; thi denne Magt er den eneste, der kan frelse det Æsthetiske ud af sin Kamp med det Ethiske.  
As soon as it did this, it would be working straight into the hand of the religious; for this power is the only one that can rescue the aesthetic out of its struggle with the ethical.

Dronning Elisabeth offrer Staten sin Kjærlighed til Essex ved at underskrive hans Dødsdom.  
Queen Elizabeth sacrifices to the State her love for Essex by signing his death warrant.

Dette var en Heltedaad, om der end var lidt personlig Fornærmelse med i Spillet, at han ikke havde sendt hende Ringen.  
This was a heroic deed, even though there was a little personal affront mixed up in the affair, that he had not sent her the ring.

Som bekjendt havde han gjort det, men ved en Hofdames Ondskab var den bleven holdt tilbage.  
As is well known, he had done so, but through the malice of a lady of the court it had been held back.

Elisabeth modtog, saa fortælles der ni fallor, Efterretningen derom, derpaa sad hun i 10 Dage med den ene Finger i Munden og beed i den uden at sige eet Ord, og derpaa døde hun.  
Elizabeth received — so it is told, ni fallor — the news of this; thereupon she sat for ten days with one finger in her mouth and bit it without saying a single word, and thereupon she died.
> ni fallor — if I am not mistaken: Latin «ni fallor» = 'if I am not mistaken', one of Kierkegaard's many learned tags dropped into the Danish. «beed» is the period past of «bide» (to bite; modern «bed»), and «eet Ord» uses the old doubled «ee» for 'one' (modern «ét»).

Dette var en Opgave for en Digter, der forstod at vriste Munden op, ellers er det i det Højeste brugeligt for en Balletmester, med hvem Digteren i vor Tid ofte nok forvexler sig selv.  
This was a task for a poet who knew how to wrench the mouth open; otherwise it is at most usable for a ballet-master, with whom the poet of our time often enough confuses himself.

Nu vil jeg lade en Skizze følge i Retning af det Dæmoniske.  
Now I will let a sketch follow in the direction of the demonic.

Dertil kan jeg bruge Sagnet om Agnete og Havmanden.  
For that I can use the legend of Agnes and the Merman.

Havmanden er en Forfører, der skyder op fra Afgrundens Skjul, i vild Lyst griber og bryder den uskyldige Blomst, der i al sin Ynde stod ved Strandbreden og tankefuldt bøjede sit Hoved efter Havets Susen.  
The Merman is a seducer who shoots up from the hiding-place of the abyss and in wild lust seizes and breaks the innocent flower that in all its loveliness stood by the seashore and pensively bowed its head to the murmur of the sea.
> Havmanden — the Merman: «Havmanden» (the merman) and «Agnete» (Agnes) come from the Scandinavian ballad of Agnete and the merman who lures her beneath the sea. Kierkegaard recasts it as a study of the demonic. Note «bøjede» / «Strandbreden» (seashore) and period spellings like «Skjul» with «kj».

Dette har hidtil været Digternes Mening.  
This has hitherto been the poets' view.

Lad os gjøre en Forandring.  
Let us make a change.
> «gjøre» — the period «gj»: «gjøre» (to make/do; modern «gøre») shows the characteristic 1843 «gj» before a front vowel, the same cluster seen in «gjerne», «gjort», «igjen». Modern Danish has dropped the silent «j».

Havmanden var en Forfører.  
The Merman was a seducer.

Han har kaldt paa Agnete, han har ved sin sledske Tale lokket det Skjulte frem i hende, hun har i Havmanden fundet, hvad hun søgte, hvoreftér hun stirrede ned paa Havsens Bund.  
He has called upon Agnes, he has by his fawning speech lured forth what was hidden in her, in the Merman she has found what she was seeking, after which she had stared down to the bottom of the sea.

Agnete vil følge ham.  
Agnes will follow him.

Havmanden har sat hende paa sin Arm, Agnete slynger sig om hans Hals; hun hengiver sig tillidsfuld af sin ganske Sjæl til den Stærkere; han staaer allerede ved Strandbreden, han bøjer sig ud over Havet for at styrte ned med sit Bytte — da seer Agnete endnu engang paa ham, ikke frygtsom, ikke tvivlende, ikke stolt af sin Lykke, ikke beruset i Lyst; men absolut troende, men absolut ydmygt som den ringe Blomst, hun tyktes sig selv at være, absolut tillidsfuldt betroer hun ham med dette Blik hele sin Skjæbne.  
The Merman has set her upon his arm, Agnes twines herself about his neck; she gives herself trustingly, with her whole soul, to the stronger one; he is already standing at the seashore, he bends out over the sea in order to plunge down with his prey — then Agnes looks at him once again, not fearful, not doubting, not proud of her good fortune, not intoxicated with desire, but absolutely believing, but absolutely humble as the lowly flower she took herself to be, and with this look she entrusts to him, absolutely trustingly, her whole destiny.
> Skjæbne — destiny: «Skjæbne» (destiny, fate; modern «skæbne») again shows the period «skj». The long sentence piles up the negatives «ikke frygtsom, ikke tvivlende …» against the affirmations «men absolut troende, men absolut ydmygt» — Agnes's absolute, trusting look is what disarms the seducer.
> «staaer», «seer» — doubled vowels + «aa»: Period orthography uses «aa» for modern «å» (so «staaer» = «står», he stands; «Strandbreden» = «strandbredden») and keeps an extra «-er»/doubled vowel in present forms like «seer» (sees; modern «ser»).

— Og see!  
— And behold!

Havet bruser ikke mere, dets vilde Røst forstummer, Naturens Lidenskab, der er Havmandens Styrke.  
The sea roars no more, its wild voice falls silent, the passion of nature, which is the Merman's strength.

lader ham i Stikken, det bliver et Blikstille — og endnu seer Agnete saaledes paa ham.  
leaves him in the lurch, it becomes a dead calm — and still Agnes looks at him so.

Da synker Havmanden sammen, han kan ikke modstaae Uskyldens Magt, hans Element bliver ham utro, han kan ikke forføre Agnete.  
Then the Merman sinks down, he cannot withstand the power of innocence, his element turns false to him, he cannot seduce Agnes.
> Uskyldens Magt — the power of innocence: «Uskyld» (innocence) and its «Magt» (power) are the moral pivot of the retelling: it is innocence, not force, that defeats the seducer. «modstaae» (withstand; modern «modstå») shows the «aa» spelling.

Han fører hende hjem igjen, han forklarer hende, at han blot vilde vise hende, hvor skjønt Havet var, naar det er stille, og Agnete troer ham.  
He leads her home again, he explains to her that he only wished to show her how beautiful the sea was when it is calm, and Agnes believes him.

— Da vender han ene tilbage, og Havet stormer, men Fortvivlelsen i Havmanden stormer vildere.  
— Then he returns alone, and the sea storms, but the despair in the Merman storms more wildly.
> Fortvivlelse — despair: «Fortvivlelse» (despair) is a key Kierkegaardian word (later the subject of «Sygdommen til Døden», The Sickness unto Death). Here the Merman's inner despair 'storms more wildly' than the sea — the demonic turned inward.

Han kan forføre Agnete, han kan forføre hundrede Agneter, han kan bedaare enhver Pige — men Agnete har seiret, og Havmanden har tabt hende.  
He can seduce Agnes, he can seduce a hundred Agneses, he can beguile any girl — but Agnes has conquered, and the Merman has lost her.

Kun som Bytte kan hun blive hans; trofast kan han ikke tilhøre nogen Pige; thi han er jo kun en Havmand.  
Only as prey can she become his; faithfully he cannot belong to any girl, for he is after all only a merman.
> «thi» — for (causal): «thi» is an archaic/literary 'for, because', extremely frequent in Kierkegaard's prose (it opens clauses giving the ground). Modern Danish would use «for». Here: «thi han er jo kun en Havmand» — 'for he is after all only a merman'.

Jeg har tilladt mig en lille Forandring”) med Havmanden, i Grunden har jeg ogsaa forandret Agnete lidt; thi i Sagnet er Agnete ikke aldeles uden Skyld, som det overhovedet er Nonsens og Lefleri og Fornærmelse mod Qvindekjønnet at tænke en Forførelse, hvor Pigen aldeles ingen, ingen, ingen Skyld har.  
I have allowed myself a little change*) with the Merman; at bottom I have also altered Agnes a little, for in the legend Agnes is not altogether without guilt, just as it is altogether nonsense and dalliance and an affront to womankind to imagine a seduction in which the girl has no, no, no guilt at all.

Agnete er i Sagnet, at jeg skal modernisere mit Udtryk lidt, en Qvinde, der forlanger det Interessante, og enhver " saadan kan altid være sikker paa, at der er en Havmand +) Ogsaa paa en anden Maade kunde man behandle hiint Sagn.  
Agnes is, in the legend — that I may modernize my expression a little — a woman who craves the interesting, and every such woman can always be sure that there is a merman +) In another way too one could treat that legend.
> det Interessante — the interesting: «det Interessante» (the interesting) is a loaded term for Kierkegaard — the restless craving of the aesthetic sphere. He makes Agnes one who 'demands the interesting', and so half-invites the merman. «Qvindekjønnet» / «Qvinde» keep the period «Qv» (modern «Kv-») for 'woman'.

Havmanden vil ikke forføre Agnete, om han end har forført Mange tidligere.  
The Merman will not seduce Agnes, even though he has seduced many before.

Han er ingen Havmand mere.  
He is no longer a merman.

eller han er, om man saa vil, en stakkels Havmand, der allerede længe har siddet nede paa Havsens Bund og sørget.  
or he is, if you will, a poor merman who has already long sat down on the bottom of the sea and grieved.

Dog veed han, som det ju læres i Sagnet, at han kan frelses ved en uskyldig Piges Kjærlighed.  
Yet he knows, as is indeed taught in the legend, that he can be saved by the love of an innocent girl.

Men han har en ond Samvitlighed med Hensyn til Pigerne, og tør ikke nærme sig dem.  
But he has a bad conscience with regard to the girls, and dares not approach them.

Da seer han Agnete.  
Then he sees Agnes.

Mange Gange har han allerede, skjult i Sivet, seet hende vandre ved Strandbreden.  
Many times already, hidden in the reeds, he has seen her walking by the seashore.

Hendes Skjønhed, liendes stille Syslen med sig selv fængsler ham til hende; men Alt er Veemod i hans Sjæl, ingen vild Lyst rører sig i den.  
Her beauty, her quiet absorption in herself, binds him to her; but all is melancholy in his soul, no wild lust stirs in it.
> Veemod — melancholy: «Veemod» (wistful melancholy, sorrowfulness; modern «vemod») colors this 'poor merman': not wild lust but mournfulness fills his soul. («liendes» is an OCR slip for «hendes», her.)

Og naar da Havmanden blander sit Suk i Sivets Hvisken, da vender hun sit Øre derhen, da staaer hun stille og synker hen i Drømme, deiligere end nogen Qvinde og dog skjøn som en frelsende Engel, der indgyder Havmanden Tillid.  
And when the Merman then mingles his sigh with the whispering of the reeds, she turns her ear thither, she stands still and sinks into dreams, lovelier than any woman and yet beautiful as a saving angel who instills trust in the Merman.

Havmanden fatter Mod, han nærmer sig Agnete, han vinder hendes Kjærlighed, han haaber sin Frelse.  
The Merman takes courage, he draws near to Agnes, he wins her love, he hopes for his salvation.

Men Agnete var ingen stille Pige, hun holdt meget af Havets Brusen, og det veemodige Suk ved Søen behagede hende kun, fordi det da brusede stærkere i hendes Indre.  
But Agnes was no quiet girl, she was very fond of the roaring of the sea, and the melancholy sigh by the water pleased her only because it then roared the more strongly within her.

Hun vil afsted, afsted, storme vildt vil hun ud i det Uendelige med Havmanden, som hun elsker — da hidser hun Havmanden.  
She will away, away, wildly she will storm out into the infinite with the Merman whom she loves — then she goads the Merman.

Hun forsmaaede hans Ydmyghed, nu vaagner Stoltheden.  
She scorned his humility, now pride awakens.

Og Havet bruser, og Bølgen fraader, og Havmanden omfavner Agnete og styrter sig i Afgrunden med hende.  
And the sea roars, and the wave foams, and the Merman embraces Agnes and plunges with her into the abyss.

Aldrig havde han været saa vild, aldrig saa attraaende; thi ved denne Pige havde han haabet sin Frelse.  
Never had he been so wild, never so craving, for in this girl he had hoped for his salvation.

Snart blev han træt af Agnete, dog fandt man aldrig hendes Liig; thi hun blev en Havfrue, der fristede Mændene med sine Sange.  
Soon he grew weary of Agnes, yet her corpse was never found, for she became a mermaid who tempted men with her songs.

Nærheden; thi Sligt opdage Havmændene med et halvt Øie og det styre de efter som Haien efter sit Bytte.  
the nearness; for such things the mermen detect with half an eye, and they steer by it as the shark by its prey.

Det er derfor meget dumt, eller ogsaa er det et Rygte, som en Havmand har ladet udsprede, at den saakaldte Dannelse sikkrer en Pige mod Forførelse.  
It is therefore very stupid, or else it is a rumor that a merman has let be spread, that so-called cultivation secures a girl against seduction.

Nei Tilværelsen er mere retfærdig og ligelig, der er kun eet Middel, det er Uskyld.  
No, existence is more just and fair: there is only one means, and that is innocence.
> Tilværelse — existence: «Tilværelsen» (existence, being) is Kierkegaard's word for the order of life itself, here personified as 'more just and fair' than cultivation — only «Uskyld» (innocence) truly protects. «Nei» is the period spelling of «nej» (no).

Vi ville nu give Havmanden en menneskelig Bevidsthed, og lade det, at han er en Havmand, betegne en menneskelig Præexistents, i hvis Conseqvents hans Liv var hildet.  
We will now give the Merman a human consciousness, and let the fact that he is a merman signify a human pre-existence in whose consequence his life was ensnared.

Der er Intet til Hinder for, at han kan blive en Helt; thi det Skridt, han nu gjør, er forsonende.  
There is nothing to hinder his becoming a hero, for the step he now takes is reconciling.

Han er frelst ved Agnete, Forføreren er knust, han har bøjet sig under Uskyldens Magt, han kan aldrig mere forføre.  
He is saved by Agnes, the seducer is crushed, he has bowed beneath the power of innocence, he can never seduce again.

Men i samme Nu stride to Magter om ham: Angeren, og Agnete og Angeren.  
But in the same instant two powers contend over him: remorse, and Agnes and remorse.
> Anger — remorse: «Anger» (remorse, repentance) is the power that, with «Agnete», contends for the saved Merman. Whether remorse takes him 'alone' (hidden) or together with Agnes (disclosed) is the whole hinge of the demonic problem that follows.

Tager Angeren ham alene, da er han skjult, tager Agnete og Angeren ham, da er han aabenbar.  
If remorse takes him alone, then he is hidden; if Agnes and remorse take him, then he is disclosed.
> skjult vs. aabenbar — hidden vs. disclosed: «skjult» (hidden, concealed) versus «aabenbar» (open, manifest, disclosed) is the governing opposition of Problema III: may the single individual stay hidden, or is disclosure ethically required? Note period «skj» and «aa» (modern «åbenbar»).

. Forsaavidt nu Angeren griber Havmanden og han forbliver skjult, da har han vel gjort Agnete ulykkelig; thi Agnete elskede ham i al sin Uskyld, hun troede, at det var Sandhed, at han i hiint Øieblik, da han forekom endog hende forandret, hvor godt han end skjulte det, blot vilde vise hende Havets skjønne Stilhed.  
. In so far now as remorse seizes the Merman and he remains hidden, then he has indeed made Agnes unhappy; for Agnes loved him in all her innocence, she believed that it was the truth, that in that moment when he appeared changed even to her, however well he concealed it, he only wished to show her the beautiful stillness of the sea.

Imidlertid bliver Havmanden selv i Retning af Lidenskab endnu mere ulykkelig; thi han elskede Agnete med en Mangfoldighed af Lidenskaber og havde desuden en ny Skyld at bære paa.  
Meanwhile the Merman himself becomes, in the direction of passion, even more unhappy; for he loved Agnes with a manifold of passions and had besides a new guilt to bear.

Det Dæmoniske i Angeren vil nu vel forklare ham, at dette er netop hans Straf, og jo mere den martrer ham, jo bedre.  
The demonic in remorse will now no doubt explain to him that this is precisely his punishment, and the more it torments him, the better.

Hengiver han sig til dette Dæmoniske, da gjør han maaskee endnu et Forsøg paa at frelse Agnete, saaledes som man i en vis Forstand kan frelse et Menneske ved Hjælp af det Onde.  
If he surrenders himself to this demonic, then he perhaps makes yet another attempt to save Agnes, in the way that one can in a certain sense save a person by the help of evil.

Han veed, at Agnete elsker ham.  
He knows that Agnes loves him.

Kunde han fravriste Agnete denne Kjærlighed, da er "hun paa en Maade frelst.  
Could he wrest this love from Agnes, then she is in a way saved.

Men hvorledes?  
But how?

At regne paa, at en aabenhjertet Tilstaaelse skulde vække hendes Afsky, det er Havmanden for forstandig til.  
To count on a frank confession arousing her loathing — the Merman is too shrewd for that.

Han vil da maaskee see, at hidse alle mørke Lidenskaber i hende, haane hende, spotte hende, gjøre hendes Kjærlighed til en Latterlighed, om muligt ægge hendes Stolthed.  
He will then perhaps try to inflame all dark passions in her, to scorn her, to mock her, to make her love a ridiculous thing, if possible to provoke her pride.

Han vil ikke skaane sig selv for nogen Qval; thi dette er den dybe Modsigelse i det Dæmoniske, og der boer i en vis Forsland uendeligt meget mene godt i en Dæmonisk end i de trivielle Mennesker.  
He will not spare himself any torment; for this is the deep contradiction in the demonic, and there dwells, in a certain sense, infinitely much more good in a demonic person than in trivial people.
> det Dæmoniske — the demonic: «det Dæmoniske» (the demonic) names the dark counterpart of faith: a single individual shut up in concealment, in absolute relation not to the divine but to evil. Kierkegaard's startling claim is that 'infinitely much more good' may dwell in such a person than in 'trivial' ones. («Forsland» is an OCR slip for «Forstand», sense.)

Jo mere selvisk Agnete er, desto lettere vil hun blive bedraget; (thi det er kun meget uerfarne Folk, der mene, at det er let at bedrage Uskyldigheden, Tilværelsen er saare dybsindig, og det er det letteste for den Kloge at narre de Kloge) men desto forfærdeligere ville Havmandens Lidelser blive.  
The more selfish Agnes is, the more easily will she be deceived; (for it is only very inexperienced folk who suppose that it is easy to deceive innocence — existence is exceedingly profound, and it is the easiest thing for the clever to dupe the clever) but the more frightful will the Merman's sufferings become.

Jø snildere hans Bedrag er anlagt, desto mindre vil Agnete blufærdigt skjule sin Lidelse for ham; hun vil bruge ethvert Middel, der da heller ikke vil blive uden Virkning, det vil sige, ikke til at rokke ham, men til at martre ham.  
The more cunningly his deception is laid, the less will Agnes bashfully hide her suffering from him; she will use every means, which then also will not be without effect — that is to say, not to shake him, but to torment him.

Ved Hjælp af det Dæmoniske vilde altsaa Havmanden være den Enkelte, der som den Enkelte var højere end det Almene.  
By the help of the demonic, then, the Merman would be the single individual who, as the single individual, was higher than the universal.
> the single individual above the universal: Via the demonic the Merman would be «den Enkelte» (the single individual) standing «højere end det Almene» (higher than the universal) — the dark mirror of faith's paradox, where the individual stands above the ethical not by God but by evil.

Det Dæmoniske har den samme Egenskab som det Guddommelige, at den Enkelte kan træde i et absolut Forhold dertil.  
The demonic has the same property as the divine, that the single individual can enter into an absolute relation to it.

Dette er Analogien, Modstykket til hiint Paradox, om hvilket vi tale.  
This is the analogy, the counterpart to that paradox of which we are speaking.
> the counterpart to the paradox: The demonic is the «Modstykke» (counterpart) to «hiint Paradox» (that paradox) of faith: both let the single individual stand in an absolute relation outside the universal, which is why their 'likeness may deceive'. «hiint» is the old demonstrative 'that (yonder)'.

Det har derfor en vis Lighed, som kan skuffe.  
It has therefore a certain likeness that may deceive.

Saaledes har Havmanden tilsyneladende det Beviis for, at hans Taushed er berettiget, at han i den lider hele sin Smerte, Imidlertid er der ingen 'Tvivl om, at han kan tale.  
Thus the Merman has, to all appearance, the proof that his silence is justified, that in it he suffers all his pain. Meanwhile there is no doubt that he can speak.

En tragisk Helt kan han da blive, i mine Tanker en grandios tragisk Helt, hvis han taler.  
A tragic hero he can then become — in my thoughts a grandiose tragic hero — if he speaks.

Faa ville maaskee kun fatte, hvori det Grandiose ligger”).  
Few perhaps will grasp wherein the grandiose lies*).

Han vil da have ") Æsthetiken behandler stundom noget Lignende med sin sædvanlige Leflen.  
He will then have *) Aesthetics sometimes treats something similar with its usual dalliance.

Havmanden bliver frelst ved Agnete, og det Hele ender"med et lykkeligt Ægteskab.  
The Merman is saved by Agnes, and the whole thing ends with a happy marriage.

Et lykMod til at fravriste sig selv ethvert Selvbedrag om, at han kan gjøre Agnete lykkelig ved sin Kunst, han vil have Mod til menneskeligt talt at knuse Agnete.  
A happy [marriage] the courage to wrest from himself every self-deception that he can make Agnes happy by his art; he will have the courage, humanly speaking, to crush Agnes.

Forøvrigt vil jeg blot her gjøre en psychologisk Bemærkning.  
For the rest, I will here merely make a psychological remark.

Jo mere Agnete har været selvisk udviklet, desto mere blændende vil Selvbedraget være, ja det er ikke utænkeligt, at det kunde forekomme i Virkeligheden, at en Havmand ved sin dæmoniske Kløgt menneskelig talt ikke blot havde frelst, men bragt noget Overordentligt ud af en Agnete; thi en Dæmon veed at pine Kræfter ud af selv det svageste Menneske, og han kan paa sin Viis mene det meget godt med et Menneske.  
The more Agnes has been selfishly developed, the more dazzling will the self-deception be; indeed it is not unthinkable that it could occur in reality, that a merman by his demonic shrewdness, humanly speaking, had not only saved but brought something extraordinary out of an Agnes; for a demon knows how to torture forces out of even the weakest human being, and he can in his way mean very well by a person.

Havmanden staaer paa en dialektisk Spidse.  
The Merman stands on a dialectical point.

Hvis han frelses ud af det Dæmoniske i Angeren, da ér der to Veie mulige.  
If he is saved out of the demonic in remorse, then two ways are possible.

Han kan holde sig tilbage, blive i det Skjulte, men ikke stole paa sin Kløgt.  
He can hold himself back, remain in concealment, but not rely on his shrewdness.

Han kommer da som den Enkelte ikke i et absolut Forhold til det Dæmoniske, men finder Hvile i Modparadoxet, at Guddommen vil frelse Agnete.  
He does not then, as the single individual, come into an absolute relation to the demonic, but finds rest in the counter-paradox that the Deity will save Agnes.
> the counter-paradox: Rather than relating absolutely to the demonic, the Merman may find rest in the «Modparadox» (counter-paradox): that «Guddommen» (the Deity) will save Agnes. It is the move Kierkegaard ascribes next to 'the Middle Ages' and the cloister.

(Saaledes vilde vel Middelalderen gjøre Bevægelsen; thi Havmanden er aabenbart ifølge dens Begreb hjemfalden til Klosteret).  
(In this way the Middle Ages would no doubt make the movement; for the Merman is plainly, according to its conception, forfeit to the cloister.)

Eller han kan frelses ved Agnete.  
Or he can be saved by Agnes.

Dette maa nu ikke forstaaes en er eee keligt Ægteskab!  
This must not now be understood [as a] hap[py marriage]! that is easy enough.

det er nemt nok.  
it is easy enough.

Skal derimod Ethiken holde Talen ved Brudevielsen, saa tæuker jeg, det bliver en anden Ting.  
If, on the other hand, ethics is to hold the address at the wedding, then I think it becomes another matter.

Æsthetiken kaster Kjærlighedens Kaabe over Havmanden, saa er Alt glemt.  
Aesthetics throws love's cloak over the Merman, and so all is forgotten.

Den er tillige skjødesløs nok til at mene, at det gaaer til ved et Ægteskab som paa en Auction, hvor Alt sælges i den Stand, i hvilken det ved Hammerslaget befindes.  
It is moreover careless enough to suppose that it goes at a marriage as at an auction, where everything is sold in the condition in which it is found at the fall of the hammer.

Den sørger blot for, at de Elskende faae hinanden, Resten bryder den sig ikke om.  
It cares only that the lovers get each other; the rest it does not trouble itself about.

Den skulde bare see, hvad der skeer bag efter; men dertil har den ikke Tid, den er strax i fuld Gang med at klappe et nyt elskende Par sammen.  
It ought just to see what happens afterward; but for that it has no time, it is at once in full swing clapping a new loving pair together.

Æsthetiken er den troløseste af alle Videnskaber.  
Aesthetics is the most faithless of all the sciences.

Enhver, der ret har elskel den, bliver i en vis Forstand ulykkelig; men den, der aldrig har elsket den, han er vg bliver et DEeCUS.  
Everyone who has rightly loved it becomes in a certain sense unhappy; but he who has never loved it, he is and remains a dunce.

saaledes, som om han ved Agnetes Kjærlighed skulde frelses fra fremtidig at blive en Forfører (dette er et æsthetisk Redningsforsøg, som altid gaaer uden om Hovedsagen, nemlig Continuiteten i Havmandens Liv); thi i denne Henseende er han frelst; han frelses forsaavidt han bliver aabenbar.  
in such a way as if by Agnes's love he were to be saved from becoming, in future, a seducer (this is an aesthetic attempt at rescue that always goes round the main point, namely the continuity in the Merman's life); for in this respect he is saved; he is saved in so far as he becomes disclosed.

Han -ægter da Agnete.  
He weds Agnes, then.

Imidlertid maa han tye til Paradoxet.  
Meanwhile he must take refuge in the paradox.

Naar nemlig den Enkelte er ved sin Skyld kommen udenfor det Almene, da kan han kun vende tilbage dertil i Kraft af, som den Enkelte at være kommen i et absolut Forhold til det Absolute.  
For when the single individual has by his guilt come outside the universal, then he can return to it only by virtue of having, as the single individual, come into an absolute relation to the absolute.
> absolute relation to the absolute: The book's defining formula: once the single individual has by guilt stepped «udenfor det Almene» (outside the universal), he can return only by coming, as the single individual, into «et absolut Forhold til det Absolute» (an absolute relation to the absolute) — the structure of faith repeated under sin.

Her vil jeg nu gjøre en Bemærkning, hvorved jeg siger mere end der er sagt paa noget Punkt i det Foregaaende”).  
Here I will now make a remark by which I say more than has been said at any point in the foregoing*).

Synden er ikke den første Umiddelbarhed, Synden er en senere Umiddelbarhed.  
Sin is not the first immediacy, sin is a later immediacy.
> Sin and immediacy: «Synden» (sin) is 'not the first immediacy' but «en senere Umiddelbarhed» (a later immediacy) — a key move toward «Begrebet Angest» (The Concept of Anxiety). «Umiddelbarhed» (immediacy) is the Hegelian term Kierkegaard is reworking against the philosophers.

I Synden er den Enkelte allerede i Retning af det dæmoniske Paradox høiere end det Almene, fordi det er en: Modsigelse af det Almene at ville fordre sig selv af den, der mangler condtitio sine qua non.  
In sin the single individual is already, in the direction of the demonic paradox, higher than the universal, because it is a contradiction of the universal to demand of itself a person who lacks the conditio sine qua non.
> conditio sine qua non: Latin 'condition without which not' — an indispensable condition (the source's «condtitio» is an OCR misspelling of «conditio»). The universal contradicts itself if it demands a self of one who lacks the very condition for being that self — Kierkegaard's wedge against an ethics that ignores sin.

Dersom Philosophien blandt Andet ogsaa tænkte paa, at det kunde falde et Menneske ind at ville handle efter dens Lære, saa vilde man faae en besynderlig Comedie ud deraf.  
If philosophy, among other things, also thought that it could occur to a person to wish to act according to its teaching, then one would get a strange comedy out of it.

En Ethik, der ignorerer Synden, er en aldeles ørkesløs Videnskab, men gjør den Synden gjældende, saa er den éo ipso ude over sig selv.  
An ethics that ignores sin is an altogether idle science; but if it makes sin count, then it is eo ipso out beyond itself.
> eo ipso — by that very fact: Latin «eo ipso» = 'by that very fact, thereby'. An ethics that takes sin seriously is, by that very fact, carried 'out beyond itself' — beyond the purely immanent ethical into the religious. «ørkesløs» = idle, futile.

Philosophien lærer, at det Umiddelbare skal ophæves.  
Philosophy teaches that the immediate is to be annulled.

Dette er sandt nok; men, hvad der ikke er sandt, er, at Synden er uden videre det Umiddelhare, ligesaa lidet som Troen uden videre er det Umiddelbare.  
This is true enough; but what is not true is that sin is, without further ado, the immediate, just as little as faith is, without further ado, the immediate.
> Tro — faith is not immediacy: «Tro» (faith) is the book's master-word, and Kierkegaard's closing thrust is that, against the philosophers, faith is no more «det Umiddelbare» (the immediate) than sin is. Faith is not a lower stage to be 'annulled' but the highest passion. («Umiddelhare» is an OCR slip for «Umiddelbare».)

Saasnart jeg bevæger mig i disse Sphærer, da gaaer ") I det Foregaaende har jeg med Flid holdt ethvert ' Hensyn til Spørgsmaalet om Synden og dens Realitet borte.  
As soon as I move in these spheres, then it goes — in what precedes I have deliberately kept every consideration of the question of sin and its reality at a distance.
> «Saasnart … da» — as soon as … then: «Saasnart» (modern «så snart») = 'as soon as'; the resuming «da» ('then') after the comma is the inversion Danish uses when a clause leads. Period orthography here is dense: «gaaer» (modern «går»), «Sphærer» (spheres), «Foregaaende» (the preceding), «Spørgsmaalet» (the question), with the doubled «aa» for modern «å». The stray «")» and «'» are footnote markers carried over from the 1843 page.

Det Hele er rettet paa Abraham, og ham kan jeg endnu naae i umiddelbare Kategorier, det vil sige, forsaavidt jeg kan forstaae ham.  
The whole thing is directed at Abraham, and him I can still reach in immediate categories — that is, insofar as I can understand him.
> «umiddelbare Kategorier» — immediate categories: «umiddelbar» = 'immediate', a technical term: a stage of life lived directly, without the mediation that sin and reflection introduce. Abraham can still be grasped «umiddelbart» because he is not the sinner. Period spelling: «naae» (reach, modern «nå»), «forstaae» (understand, modern «forstå»), «forsaavidt» (insofar as).

Saasnart Synden kommer frem, da gaaer Ethiken til Grunde, netop paa Angeren; thi Angeren er det højeste ethiske Udtryk, men netop som saadant den dybeste ethiske Selvmodsigelse.  
As soon as sin comes forward, then ethics founders, precisely upon repentance; for repentance is the highest ethical expression, yet precisely as such the deepest ethical self-contradiction.
> «Anger» — repentance: «Anger» = repentance, contrition (modern «anger»). It is the highest move ethics can make, yet it is also where ethics breaks down («gaaer til Grunde» = founders, goes to ruin): in repenting, the ethical confesses it cannot make the self whole again. «thi» = the weighty archaic 'for'; «det Ethiske» (the ethical) is this book's name for the universal.

Frygt og Bæven.  
Fear and Trembling.

3. Udg. 8 Alt let, men hvad her er sagt, forklarer heller ikke Abraham ; thi Abraham var ikke ved Synden bleven den Enkelte, han var tværtimod den retfærdige Mand, der er Guds Udvalgte.  
3rd ed. 8 All easy, but what has been said here does not explain Abraham either; for Abraham had not become the single individual through sin — on the contrary, he was the righteous man, the one who is God's chosen.
> «den Enkelte» — the single individual: «den Enkelte» (the single individual) is the book's central figure: the one who stands higher than «det Almene» (the universal). The merman of the preceding pages becomes «den Enkelte» through sin; Abraham did not — he is «den retfærdige Mand», the righteous man. «bleven» = old past participle 'become' (modern «blevet»).

Analogien til Abraham vil da først vise sig, efterat den Enkelte .er bragt istand til at kunne gjøre det Almene, og nu Paradoxet gjentager sig.  
The analogy to Abraham will therefore appear only after the single individual has been put in a position to be able to realize the universal, and now the paradox repeats itself.
> «Paradoxet» og «det Almene»: «Paradoxet» (the paradox) is the situation in which the single individual stands absolutely related to the absolute, above «det Almene» (the universal, the ethical). The penitent can return to the universal only by a fresh paradoxical movement. Period spelling: «efterat» (after), «gjøre» (do/realize, with «gj»), «gjentager» (repeats). The stray period before «er» is a source artifact, kept verbatim.

Havmandens Bevægelser kan jeg derfor forstaae, medens jeg ikke kan forstaae Abraham; thi Havmanden kommer netop ved Paradoxcet til at ville realisere det Almene.  
The merman's movements I can therefore understand, whereas I cannot understand Abraham; for the merman, precisely by way of the paradox, comes to will the realization of the universal.

Forbliver han nemlig skjult og indvier sig til alle Angerens Qvaler, da vorder han en Dæmon, og er som saadan tilintetgjort.  
For if he remains hidden and devotes himself to all the torments of repentance, then he becomes a demon, and as such is annihilated.
> «skjult» — hidden; «vorder» — becomes: Hiddenness («det Skjulte») is the danger: by hiding instead of disclosing himself, the merman becomes demonic. «vorder» is an archaic, elevated 'becomes' (modern «bliver»). Period orthography: «skjult» (hidden, «kj»→«sk j»), «Qvaler» (torments, modern «kvaler»), «tilintetgjort» (annihilated, with «gj»).

Forbliver han skjult, men mener ikke kløgtigt ved selv at martres i Angerens Trældom at kunne arbeide Agnete løs, saa faaer han vel Fred, men han er tabt for denne Verden.  
If he remains hidden but does not cleverly suppose that, by being tormented himself in the bondage of repentance, he can work Agnete loose, then he does indeed gain peace, but he is lost to this world.
> «Trældom» — bondage: «Trældom» = bondage, thraldom — the servitude of self-imposed repentance. «kløgtigt» = cleverly, shrewdly (often with a faint negative shading, as here). Period spelling: «arbeide» (work, modern «arbejde»), «faaer» (gets, modern «får»), «vel» here = 'indeed / to be sure'.

Bliver han aabenbar, lader han sig frelse ved Agnete. da er han det største Meuneske, jeg kan forestille mig; thi det er kun Æsthetiken, der letsindig mener at prise Kjærlighedens Magt ved at lade den Fortabte elskes af en uskyldig Pige og derved frelses; det er kun Æsthetiken, der seer feil, og troer, at Pigen er Heltinden, istedenfor at Havmanden er det.  
If he becomes manifest, lets himself be saved through Agnete, then he is the greatest human being I can imagine; for it is only aesthetics that frivolously supposes it is praising the power of love by letting the lost one be loved by an innocent girl and thereby saved; it is only aesthetics that sees wrongly, and believes the girl is the heroine, instead of the merman being it.
> «aabenbar» — manifest, disclosed: «aabenbar» (modern «åbenbar») = manifest, openly disclosed — the opposite of «skjult» (hidden); disclosure is the move that saves the merman. «Æsthetiken» = aesthetics, the lowest of Kierkegaard's three stages, which mistakes the girl for the hero. «den Fortabte» = the lost one. The misprint «Meuneske» (for «Menneske») and the period after «Agnete» are source artifacts, kept verbatim.

Havmanden kan da ikke tilhøre Agnete uden at han, efterat have gjort Angerens uendelige Bevægelse, endnu gjør een Bevægelse, Bevægelsen i Kraft af det Absurde.  
The merman cannot then belong to Agnete unless he, after making the infinite movement of repentance, makes yet one more movement — the movement by virtue of the absurd.
> «i Kraft af det Absurde» — by virtue of the absurd: «i Kraft af det Absurde» (by virtue of the absurd) is the signature phrase of faith in this book: after the infinite resignation (here the «Angerens Bevægelse», the movement of repentance), faith makes one more movement and gets the finite back, against all reason. «een» (one) is written doubled to stress the single, decisive move. «uendelige» = infinite.

Ved egen Kraft kan han gjøre Angerens Bevægelse, men han bruger ogsaa absolut hele sin Kraft dertil, og derfor kan han umulig igjen ved egen Kraft komme tilbage og gribe Virkeligheden.  
By his own strength he can make the movement of repentance, but he also uses absolutely all his strength for it, and therefore he cannot possibly, by his own strength, come back again and grasp reality.
> «ved egen Kraft» — by one's own strength: Resignation is something a person can do «ved egen Kraft» (by his own strength); faith is not — that is why it requires the absurd. «Virkeligheden» = reality, actuality (modern «virkeligheden»), the finite world the believer wins back. «umulig» here functions adverbially: 'cannot possibly'. «igjen» = again (with «gj»).

Naar man ikke har Lidenskab nok til hverken at gjøre den ene eller den anden Bevægelse, naar man sjudsker sig gjennem Livet, angrer lidt og mener, saa gaaer nok Resten,. da har man engang for alle Gange renonceret paa at leve i Ideen, og saa kan man meget let opnaae og forhjælpe Andre til det Højeste 2: bedaare sig selv og Andre i den Forestilling, at i Aandens Verden gaaer det til som i Gnavspil, hvor Alt gaaer paa bedste Beskub.  
When a person does not have passion enough to make either the one movement or the other, when he slovens his way through life, repents a little and supposes the rest will manage well enough — then he has once and for all renounced living in the idea, and then he can very easily attain, and help others to, the highest, namely: to delude himself and others into imagining that in the world of spirit things go as in a game of dice, where everything goes by sheer luck.
> «Lidenskab» — passion: «Lidenskab» (passion) is, for Kierkegaard, the engine of every existential movement; without it one makes neither resignation nor faith and simply «sjudsker» — slovens, slouches — through life. «Gnavspil» is an old dice/board game played «paa bedste Beskub» (at random, by luck). The «2:» is a period printer's shorthand for «:» introducing an explanation; the stray comma before «.» is a source artifact, kept verbatim.

Man kan da forlyste sig selv ved at betænke, hvor underligt det dog er, at netop i en Tid, hvor jo Enhver kan gjøre det Højeste, Tvivlen om Sjælens Udødelighed kan være saa udbredt; thi den, der virkelig har gjort blot Uendelighedens Bevægelse, han tvivler neppe.  
One may then amuse oneself by reflecting how strange it is, after all, that precisely in an age in which everyone, indeed, can do the highest, doubt about the immortality of the soul can be so widespread; for whoever has really made even just the movement of infinity scarcely doubts.
> «Sjælens Udødelighed» — the immortality of the soul: «Udødelighed» = immortality; «Sjælens» is the genitive 'of the soul'. Kierkegaard's irony: an age that thinks everyone can do «det Højeste» (the highest) is also riddled with doubt about immortality — proof no one has truly made even «Uendelighedens Bevægelse» (the movement of infinity, i.e. resignation). «neppe» = scarcely, hardly.

Lidenskabens Slutninger ere de eneste paalidelige 3: de eneste overbevisende.  
The conclusions of passion are the only reliable ones, namely: the only convincing ones.
> «ere» — are; «3:» — namely: «ere» is the archaic plural 'are' (modern «er»), agreeing with the plural «Slutninger» (conclusions, inferences). The «3:» is again the period typographic mark introducing a gloss — read it as «:» / 'that is, namely'. «paalidelige» = reliable (modern «pålidelige»).

Heldigviis er Tilværelsen her kjærligere, trofastere end hvad Viismænd paastaae, thi den udelukker intet Menneske end ikke det ringeste, den narrer Ingen, thi i Åandens Verden er kun den narret, der narrer sig selv.  
Fortunately, existence here is more loving, more faithful, than what wise men maintain; for it excludes no human being, not even the lowliest; it deceives no one, for in the world of spirit only the one who deceives himself is deceived.
> «Tilværelsen» — existence: «Tilværelsen» = existence, being-here — the whole order of life, here imagined as generous and faithful. «Viismænd» = wise men, sages (compounded «Viis» + «Mænd»). «paastaae» = maintain, assert (modern «påstå»). «narrer» = fools, deceives; the lovely turn is that in «Aandens Verden» (the world of spirit) the only one deceived is the self-deceiver. «Åandens» is a source typo for «Aandens», kept verbatim.

Det er Alles Mening, og forsaavidt jeg tør tillade mig at dømme derom, er det ogsaa min Mening, at det er ikke det Høieste at gaae i Kloster, men derfor er det ingenlunde min Mening, at i vor Tid, da intet Menneske gaaer i Kloster, Enhver er større end de dybe og alvorlige " Sjæle, der fandt Hvile i et Kloster.  
It is everyone's opinion, and insofar as I dare allow myself to judge of it, it is also my opinion, that to go into a monastery is not the highest; but for that reason it is by no means my opinion that, in our age, when no one goes into a monastery, every single person is greater than the deep and earnest souls who found rest in a monastery.

Hvor Mange har i vor Tid Lidenskab nok til at tænke det og da at dømme sig selv oprigtigt.  
How many in our age have passion enough to think that, and then to judge themselves honestly.

Alene Forestillingen om, saaledes at tage Tiden paa sin Samvittighed, at give den Tid til i sin søvnløse Utrættelighed at udforske hver en lønlig Tanke, saaledes, at man, hvis man ikke hvert Øjieblik gjør Bevægelsen i Kraft af det Ædleste og Helligste i et Menneske, med Angst og Gru kan opdage”), og om ikke ved andet, saa ved Angst fremlokke den dunkle Rørelse, som dog skjuler sig i ethvert Menneskeliv, medens man, naar man lever i Samfund med Andre, saa let glemmer, saa let slipper fra det, paa saa mange Maader holdes oppe, faaer Leilighed til at begynde paa en frisk ") Dette troer man ikke paa i vor alvorlige Tid, og dog er det mærkeligt nok, at selv i det, ifølge sit Væsen, mere letsindige og mindre gjennemreflekterede Hedenskab, de to egentlige Repræsentanter for den græske Anskuelse af Tilværelsen yvwde oavrov, hver paa sin Viis have antydet, at man ved at fordybe sig i sig selv først og fremmest opdager Dispositionen til det Onde.  
The mere thought of thus taking time upon one's conscience — of giving it time, in its sleepless indefatigability, to search out every secret thought, so that, if one does not every instant make the movement by virtue of the noblest and holiest in a human being, one may with anxiety and dread discover, and, if by nothing else, then by anxiety lure forth the dark stirring that nevertheless hides in every human life, while a person, when he lives in community with others, so easily forgets, so easily slips away from it, is in so many ways held up, and gets occasion to begin afresh — this people in our earnest age do not believe; and yet it is remarkable enough that even in paganism, which by its very nature is more frivolous and less thoroughly reflective, the two real representatives of the Greek view of existence, know thyself, each in his own way intimated that by sinking into oneself one first and foremost discovers the disposition to evil.
> «Angst» — anxiety, dread: «Angst» (anxiety, dread) is one of Kierkegaard's deepest concepts — the indefinite unease before one's own freedom and the «Disposition til det Onde» (disposition to evil). The Greek phrase «yvwde oavrov» is a garbled rendering of γνῶθι σεαυτόν — 'know thyself' — the maxim Kierkegaard ascribes to Pythagoras and Socrates. The «")» and «”)» are 1843 footnote markers, and the Greek is preserved exactly as the cleaned source carried it.
> Period orthography in a long sentence: This single sentence runs the length of a paragraph — Kierkegaard's hallmark. Note the doubled «aa» throughout: «saaledes» (thus), «paa» (on/upon), «faaer» (gets), «Maader» (ways). «Leilighed» = opportunity (modern «lejlighed»); «gjennemreflekterede» = thoroughly reflected; «Øjieblik» is a source misprint for «Øieblik» (instant), kept verbatim.

At jeg tænker paa Pythagoras og Socrates, behøver jeg vel ikke at sige.  
That I am thinking of Pythagoras and Socrates I scarcely need to say.

— alene denne Forestilling, opfattet med sømmelig Ærbødighed, tænkte jeg kunde tugte mangen Enkelt i vor Tid, der allerede mener, at være kommen til det Højeste.  
— this thought alone, grasped with fitting reverence, I supposed might chasten many a single individual in our age who already imagines he has arrived at the highest.
> «tugte» — to chasten: «tugte» = to discipline, chasten, correct (related to «Tugt», discipline). The em-dash opening resumes the thought of the long sentence above after its footnote. «sømmelig Ærbødighed» = seemly / fitting reverence; «kommen» is the old past participle 'come / arrived' (modern «kommet»).

Dog dette bekymrer man sig lidet om i vor Tid, der er kommen til det Højeste, medens dog ingen Tid som netop den har været hjemfalden til det Comiske.  
But about this people trouble themselves little in our age, which has arrived at the highest — even though no age, precisely as this one, has been so forfeit to the comic.
> «hjemfalden til det Comiske» — forfeit to the comic: «hjemfalden til» = forfeited to, fallen prey to (a legal-flavoured idiom). «det Comiske» (the comic, modern «komiske») is the irony Kierkegaard turns on an age that congratulates itself on reaching «det Højeste» — it is the most ridiculous age of all. «bekymrer sig om» = troubles oneself about, cares about.

Og ubegribeligt er det, at det ikke allerede er skeet, at Tiden selv ved en generatio æquivoca har affødt sin Helt, den Dæmon, der skaanselsløst vil opføre det forfærdelige Skuespil, at bringe hele Tiden til at lee og bringe den til at glemme, at den leer ad sig selv.  
And it is inconceivable that it has not already happened that the age itself, by a generatio æquivoca, has begotten its hero, the demon who would mercilessly stage the dreadful spectacle of bringing the whole age to laugh and bringing it to forget that it is laughing at itself.

Eller hvad er Tilværelsen mere værd end at lee ad, naar man allerede i sit 20de Aar er kommen til det Højeste.  
Or what is existence worth more than to be laughed at, when one has already in one's twentieth year arrived at the highest.

Og dog hvilken højere Bevægelse har Tiden udfundet siden den Stund, da man opgav alt gaae i Kloster?  
And yet what higher movement has the age devised since the hour when people gave up going into a monastery at all?
> «Bevægelse» — movement: «Bevægelse» (movement) is the running metaphor of the whole book — the inward 'moves' of resignation and faith. The monastic vow was a genuine «højere Bevægelse» (higher movement); the modern age, Kierkegaard insists, has invented no higher one. «udfundet» = devised, hit upon; «den Stund, da» = the hour when. «alt» here = 'at all' (modern «helt», colloquial).

Er det ikke en jammerlig Leveviisdom, Klogskab, Modløshed, der sidder til Højbords, der feigt indbilder Menneskene, at de have gjort det Højeste, og lumskeligen afholder dem fra endog at forsøge det Mindre?  
Is it not a pitiful worldly wisdom, prudence, faint-heartedness, that sits at the head of the table, that cravenly persuades people that they have done the highest, and slyly keeps them from even attempting the lesser?
> «Leveviisdom» — worldly wisdom: «Leveviisdom» = wisdom for getting along in life, worldly prudence (compounded «Leve-» + «Viisdom»). Kierkegaard pairs it with «Klogskab» (shrewdness) and «Modløshed» (faint-heartedness) as the cowardly counsel that flatters people into thinking they have done «det Højeste». «feigt» = cravenly; «lumskeligen» = slyly, insidiously; «have» = old plural 'have'.

Den, der har gjort Klosterbevægelsen, han har kun een Bevægelse tilbage, det er det Absurdes.  
The one who has made the monastic movement has only one movement left, and that is the movement of the absurd.
> «Klosterbevægelsen» — the monastic movement: «Klosterbevægelsen» (the cloister-movement) is Kierkegaard's name for infinite resignation in its medieval form. Whoever has truly made it stands exactly where the knight of faith stands before his second move: only «det Absurdes» (the absurd's) movement remains. «een» (one) is doubled for emphasis; «det Absurdes» is the genitive, 'the absurd's [movement]'.

Hvor Mange forstaae i vor Tid, hvad det Absurde er, hvor Mange leve i vor Tid saaledes, at de have givet Afkald paa Alt, eller have faaet Alt, hvor Mange ere blot saa redelige, at de vide, hvad de kunne og hvad de ikke kunne?  
How many in our age understand what the absurd is; how many live in our age so as to have renounced everything, or to have received everything; how many are merely so honest that they know what they can and what they cannot do?
> «give Afkald paa» — to renounce: «give Afkald paa» = to renounce, give up — the act of infinite resignation ('renounced everything'); its paradoxical counterpart is to «have faaet Alt» (have received everything) by faith. «redelig» = honest, upright. Note the old plural verb endings throughout: «forstaae», «leve», «have», «ere», «vide», «kunne» — all modern singular «-r» forms in period plural.

Og er det ikke sandt, forsaavidt man finder saadanne, man snarest finder dem blandt de mindre Dannede og tildeels blandt Qvinder?  
And is it not true that, insofar as one finds such people, one most readily finds them among the less educated and partly among women?
> «Qvinder» — women: «Qvinder» = women (modern «kvinder»), with the period «Qv» for «kv». «de mindre Dannede» = the less cultivated / educated; Kierkegaard, half-provocatively, finds the honesty he prizes more often among the unschooled and among women than among the learned. «snarest» here = most readily, soonest; «tildeels» = in part (modern «til dels»).

I en Art Clairvoyance aabenbarer Tiden, saaledes som en Dæmonisk altid aabenbarer sig selv uden at forstaae sig selv, sin Brøst; thi den fordrer atter og atter det Comiske.  
In a kind of clairvoyance the age discloses its defect — just as a demonic person always discloses himself without understanding himself; for it demands, again and again, the comic.
> «Brøst» — defect, flaw: «Brøst» = defect, want, flaw (an archaic word, related to 'burst / breach'). The age, like «en Dæmonisk» (a demonic person), unwittingly betrays its own lack by the very thing it craves — «det Comiske», the comic. «aabenbarer» = discloses, reveals (modern «åbenbarer»); «fordrer» = demands; «atter og atter» = again and again.

Skulde det virkelig være det, Tiden behøvede, skulde Theatret maaskee behøve et nyt Stykke, hvor det blev gjort latterligt, at Een døde af Kjærlighed, eller vilde det ikke snarere være Frelsende for Tiden, hvis det skete iblandt os, hvis Tiden blev Vidne til en saadan Begivenhed, for at den engang kunde faae Mod til at troe paa Aandens Magt, Mod til at lade være, feigt at qvæle det Bedre i sig selv, misundeligt at qvæle det hos Andre — ved Latteren.  
Could that really be what the age needed; could the theatre perhaps need a new play in which it was made ridiculous that someone died of love — or would it not rather be saving for the age if it happened among us, if the age became witness to such an event, so that it might for once gain the courage to believe in the power of spirit, the courage to stop cravenly stifling the better in itself and enviously stifling it in others — by laughter.
> «Skulde» — should/could (conditional): «Skulde» (modern «skulle») is the past-subjunctive auxiliary opening a rhetorical question — 'could it be that…?'. Kierkegaard stacks the conditional clauses, then turns to «vilde det ikke snarere…» (would it not rather…). «troe paa Aandens Magt» = believe in the power of spirit. Period spelling: «qvæle» (stifle, modern «kvæle»), «faae» (gain), «troe» (believe, modern «tro»).
> «Frelsende» — saving: «frelsende» = saving, redemptive (from «frelse», to save) — what the age really needs is not more comedy but a redemptive event. «feigt» = cravenly; «misundeligt» = enviously. «det Bedre i sig selv» = the better in oneself: the age stifles its own higher possibility, and out of envy stifles it in others too — and laughter is its weapon.

Skulde Tiden virkelig behøve en latterlig Erscheinung af en Opvakt, for at faae Noget at lee ad, eller skulde den ikke snarere behøve, at en saadan begeistret Skikkelse mindede den om, hvad der var glemt?  
Could the age really need a ridiculous apparition of an awakened one, so as to get something to laugh at — or would it not rather need such an inspired figure to remind it of what had been forgotten?

Vilde man have et Anlæg i en lignende Stil, der dog, fordi Angerens Lidenskab ikke blev sat i Bevægelse, "vilde blive mere rørende, saa kunde man dertil benytte en Fortælling, der forekommer i Tobiæ Bog.  
If one wanted a plot in a similar style, which yet — because the passion of repentance was not set in motion — would be more moving, then one could use for it a story that occurs in the Book of Tobit.

Den unge Tobias vil ægte Raguels og Ednas Datter Sara.  
The young Tobias wishes to marry Sara, the daughter of Raguel and Edna.

Med denne Pige har det et sørgeligt Sammenhæng.  
With this girl there is a sorrowful state of affairs.
> «Sammenhæng» — connection, circumstance: «Sammenhæng» = connection, coherence, the way things hang together — here idiomatically 'a sad set of circumstances'. «ægte» (previous sentence) = to wed, marry. «sørgeligt» = sorrowful, sad. The understated tone sets up the grim tale of Sara's seven dead bridegrooms that follows.

Hun har været given til 7 Mænd, der alle ere omkomne i Brudehuset.  
She has been given to seven men, all of whom perished in the bridal chamber.
> «ere omkomne» — have perished: «ere omkomne» is the period perfect: «ere» (archaic plural 'are', modern «er») + the past participle «omkomne» (perished) agreeing in plural. Modern Danish would say «er omkommet». «Brudehuset» = the bridal house/chamber. The seven dead bridegrooms are killed by the demon Asmodeus in the Tobit story.

Dette er i Retning af mit Anlæg en Fregne ved Fortællingen; thi den comiske Virkning er næsten uundgaaelig, naar Tanken vækkes om en Piges 7 frugtesløse Forsøg paa at blive gift, skjøndt hun var ganske nær derved, ligesaa nær som en Student, der 7 Gange gik reject til Attestats.  
This, in the direction of my plot, is a blemish on the story; for the comic effect is almost unavoidable when the thought is awakened of a girl's seven fruitless attempts to get married, though she came quite close to it — just as close as a student who went down to rejection at his theology examination seven times.

I Tobiæ Bog ligger Accenten paa et andet Sted, og derfor er det høie Tal af Vigtighed og i en vis Forstand endog et tragisk Medvirkende; thi desto større er den unge Tobias's Høimod, deels forsaavidt han er Forældrenes eneste Søn (6, 15), deels fordi det Afskrækkende mere paanøder sig.  
In the Book of Tobit the accent lies in another place, and therefore the high number is of importance and in a certain sense even a tragic contributing factor; for the greater is the young Tobias's magnanimity, partly insofar as he is his parents' only son (6:15), partly because the deterrent presses itself more upon one.
> «Høimod» — magnanimity: «Høimod» = high-mindedness, magnanimity, noble courage (modern «højmod»). In Tobit the high number of dead suitors heightens «det Afskrækkende» (the deterrent, the off-putting), and so magnifies Tobias's daring. «deels … deels» = partly … partly (modern «dels … dels»); «paanøder sig» = forces / presses itself upon one. «(6, 15)» is the chapter-and-verse citation.

Dette maa altsaa bort.  
This, then, must go.

Sara er da en Pige, der aldrig har elsket, der endnu gjemmer en ung Piges Salighed, hendes uhyre Prioritets Obligation i Tilværelsen, hendes ,Vollmachtbrief zum Glåcke" — at elske en Mand af sit ganske Hjerte.  
Sara, then, is a girl who has never loved, who still keeps a young girl's blessedness, her immense priority-claim upon existence, her 'warrant of attorney to happiness' — to love a man with her whole heart.

Og dog er hun ulykkeligere end Nogen, thi hun veed, at den onde Dæmon, der elsker hende, vil dræbe Brudgommen 1 Bryllupsnatten.  
And yet she is more unhappy than anyone, for she knows that the evil demon who loves her will kill the bridegroom on the wedding night.

Jeg har læst om megen Sorg, men jeg tvivler om, at der nogensteds findes saa dyb en Sorg som den, der ligger i denne Piges Liv.  
I have read of much sorrow, but I doubt that anywhere there is to be found a sorrow so deep as the one that lies in this girl's life.

Naar dog Ulykken kommer udenfra, saa er der dog Trøst at finde.  
When misfortune does come from outside, there is, after all, consolation to be found.
> «udenfra» — from outside: Kierkegaard's distinction: misfortune that comes «udenfra» (from outside) leaves room for «Trøst» (consolation), because one could have received the good it withheld. Sara's sorrow is worse — it is bound to her from within. «dog» appears twice as a softening 'after all / yet'. «Naar» = when (modern «når»).

Om Tilværelsen ikke bragte et Menneske, hvad der kunde nave gjort ham lykkeligt, det er dog en Trøst, at han kunde have modtaget det.  
Even if existence did not bring a person what could have made him happy, it is still a consolation that he could have received it.
> «Om … ikke» — even if … not: «Om» here is concessive, 'even if / though' (not the question-word 'whether'). The thought completes s43: the consolation of ordinary misfortune is the bare capacity to have received happiness. «nave» is a source misprint for «have» (have), kept verbatim; «modtaget» = received; «Tilværelsen» = existence.

Men den uudgrundelige Sorg. som ingen Tid kan adsprede, ingen Tid læge, at vide, at det hjalp Intet, om Tilværelsen gjorde Alt!  
But the unfathomable sorrow, which no time can dispel, no time can heal — to know that it would help nothing even if existence did everything!
> «uudgrundelig» — unfathomable: «uudgrundelig» = unfathomable, bottomless (literally 'un-out-ground-able'). This is the worse sorrow named in s43–44: Sara cannot even receive happiness, so no remedy would touch her grief. «adsprede» = dispel, scatter (modern «adsprede»/«sprede»); «læge» = to heal (modern «læge», cf. «lægedom»). The period after «Sorg» is a source artifact, kept verbatim.

En græsk Forfatter skjuler i sin simple Naivitet saa uendeligt Meget, naar han siger: zavrugs yde ovders ”Eqwru ågvyev 1) pævEstan, MÉyor dv xakkos 1 xæl ogdauo Båtmwoiwv (cfr. Longi Pastoralia).  
A Greek author conceals so infinitely much in his simple naïveté when he says: [Greek] (cf. Longus, Pastoralia).

Der var mangen Pige, der blev ulykkelig i Kjærlighed, men hun blev det dog, Sara var det, før hun blev det.  
There was many a girl who became unhappy in love, but she did become it; Sara was it before she became it.
> «blev» vs. «var» — became vs. was: The whole pathos turns on the verbs: other girls «blev» (became) unhappy in love, having first had love; Sara «var» (was) it from the start — unhappy before she could ever love. «mangen Pige» = many a girl (singular «mangen» + noun). «Kjærlighed» = love (modern «kærlighed»), with period «Kj».

Det er tungt, ikke at finde den, til hvem man kan hengive sig, men det er uudsigeligt tungt ikke at kunne hengive sig.  
It is heavy not to find the one to whom one can give oneself, but it is unspeakably heavy not to be able to give oneself.
> «hengive sig» — to give oneself, surrender: «hengive sig» = to give / devote / surrender oneself — the key word in the Sara passage. The contrast is exact: hard not to find one to whom to surrender, but «uudsigeligt» (unspeakably) harder to be unable to surrender at all. «tungt» = heavy, grievous; «uudsigeligt» = unutterably, inexpressibly.

En ung Pige hengiver sig, og da siger man: nu er hun ikke fri mere, men Sara var aldrig fri, og dog havde hun aldrig hengivet sig.  
A young girl gives herself, and then people say: now she is no longer free — but Sara was never free, and yet she had never given herself.

Det er tungt, om en Pige hengav sig, og blev bedragen, men Sara var bedragen, før hun hengav sig.  
It is hard if a girl gave herself and was deceived, but Sara was deceived before she gave herself.
> «bedragen» — deceived, betrayed: «bedragen» = deceived, defrauded, betrayed (past participle of «bedrage»). Kierkegaard sharpens the paradox each sentence: Sara is robbed «før» (before) she can act — betrayed before surrender, unhappy before love. «om» is concessive here ('if / even if'); «hengav sig» = past tense of «hengive sig», gave herself.

Hvilken Verdens Sorg ligger der ikke 1 det Følgende, da Tobias endelig vil ægte hende?  
What a world of sorrow lies in what follows, when Tobias finally means to marry her?
> «Hvilken … ikke» — exclamatory question: «Hvilken … ikke» is an exclamatory rhetorical question — 'what a world of sorrow there is…!' — the «ikke» intensifying rather than negating. «1» is a source misprint for «i» (in), kept verbatim. «det Følgende» = what follows; «ægte» = to wed; «endelig» = finally.

Hvilke Bryllups-Ceremonier, hvilke Forberedelser!  
What wedding ceremonies, what preparations!

- Ingen Pige er bleven bedragen som Sara; thi hun blev bedragen for det Saligste af Alt, den absolute Rigdom, som selv den fattigste Pige eier, bedragen for Hengivelsens trygge, ubegrændsede, ubundne, tøilesløse Fortabelse; thi der skulde jo først ryges, idet Hjertet af Fisken og Leveren blev lagt paa glødende Emmer.  
— No girl has been deceived as Sara was; for she was cheated of the most blessed of all, the absolute riches that even the poorest girl possesses, cheated of the secure, unbounded, unbound, unbridled self-abandon of surrender; for there had first to be a fumigation, as the heart and liver of the fish were laid upon glowing embers.
> «Hengivelsens Fortabelse» — the self-loss of surrender: «Hengivelse» = surrender, self-giving; «Fortabelse» = a losing of oneself (here positive — blissful abandon). The piled adjectives «trygge, ubegrændsede, ubundne, tøilesløse» (secure, unbounded, unbound, unbridled) name everything Sara is robbed of. The «ryges»/fish detail is the smoke-charm from Tobit (6:16–17) that drives off the demon. «bleven» = old participle 'become'; «eier» = owns (modern «ejer»).

Og hvorledes maa Moderen ikke tage Afsked med Datteren, der da ligesom hun selv er bedragen for Alt, i Continuitet hermed maa bedrage Moderen for det Skjønneste.  
And how must the mother not take leave of the daughter, who — being herself, like the mother, cheated of everything — must in continuity with this cheat the mother of the most beautiful thing.
> «tage Afsked» — to take leave: «tage Afsked med» = to take leave of, say farewell to. The bitter chain: Sara, cheated of everything, must in turn cheat her mother Edna of «det Skjønneste» (the most beautiful thing) — a joyful wedding. «hvorledes … ikke» is again exclamatory ('how must she not…!'). «Skjønneste» = most beautiful (modern «skønneste», period «Skj»).

Man læse blot Fortællingen.  
One has only to read the story.
> «Man læse» — let one read (jussive): «læse» without «-r» here is the jussive/optative subjunctive: 'let one read', 'one has only to read' — an old construction surviving in fixed phrases. «blot» = merely, only. Kierkegaard now quotes the Tobit text directly in the sentences that follow.

Edna tilberedte Kammeret og hun ledede Sara derind, og græd, og hun annammede sin Datters Graad.  
Edna prepared the chamber and led Sara into it, and wept, and she received her daughter's tears.
> «annamme» — to receive, take to oneself: «annamme» is an archaic, solemn 'to receive, accept, take to oneself' (from Low German), with a liturgical ring — the right word for a mother receiving her daughter's tears. «tilberedte» = prepared; «Kammeret» = the chamber; «Graad» = weeping, tears (modern «gråd»).

Og hun sagde ti hende: mit Barn vær frimodig!  
And she said to her: my child, be of good courage!
> «frimodig» — of good courage: «frimodig» = bold, of good cheer, free-spirited — the standard biblical 'be of good courage'. «ti» is a source misprint for «til» (to), kept verbatim. This is Kierkegaard quoting Tobit 7–8 in older Danish phrasing.

Himmelens og Jordens Herre give Dig Glæde for denne Din Sorg!  
May the Lord of heaven and earth give you joy for this your sorrow!
> «give» — may [the Lord] give (optative): «give» without «-r» is the optative subjunctive of blessing — 'may the Lord give', like English 'God save the King'. The capitalized «Dig» / «Din» (you / your) are the period reverential capitals. «Glæde for denne Din Sorg» = joy in place of this your sorrow.

Datter, vær frimodig.  
Daughter, be of good courage.

Og nu Bryllups Øieblikket, man læse, hvis man ellers kan det for Taarer: men da de begge vare indelukte tilhobe, opstod Tobias af Sengen og sagde: Staa op Søster!  
And now the wedding moment — let one read, if one otherwise can for tears: but when the two of them were shut in together, Tobias rose from the bed and said: Get up, sister!
> «tilhobe» — together; «vare» — were: «tilhobe» = together, all in a heap (archaic). «vare» is the period plural past 'were' (modern «var»); «indelukte» = shut in, enclosed. «for Taarer» = for [the] tears (i.e. too moved to read). Tobias calling his bride «Søster» (sister) follows the Tobit text, where they pray instead of consummating the marriage that night.

og vi vil bede, at Herren maa forbarme sig over os (8, 4).  
and let us pray that the Lord may have mercy upon us (8:4).
> «forbarme sig» — to have mercy: «forbarme sig over» = to take pity on, have mercy upon — a solemn, biblical verb. «(8, 4)» cites Tobit 8:4. «bede» = to pray; «maa» here is the optative 'may'. Instead of the wedding night, Tobias turns to prayer — the very gesture Kierkegaard finds so moving.

Dersom en Digter læste denne Fortælling, dersom han vilde benytte den, jeg vedder hundrede mod En, han lagde Alt an påa den unge Tobias.  
If a poet read this story, if he wanted to use it, I wager a hundred to one he would stake everything on the young Tobias.
> «Dersom» + past subjunctive — if: «Dersom» is the formal conditional 'if' (alternative to «hvis»); with the past-tense verbs «læste», «vilde», «lagde» it forms an unreal/hypothetical conditional — 'if a poet were to read…'. «lægge Alt an paa» = to stake / bank everything on. «vedder hundrede mod En» = wager a hundred to one. «påa» is a source misprint for «paa» (on), kept verbatim.

Dette Heltemod at ville vove sit Liv i en saa øjensynlig Fare, hvorom Fortællingen endnu engang minder; thi Raguel siger Morgenen efter Brylluppet til Edna: send en af Pigerne hen og lad hende see, om han lever, men hvis ikke, at jeg kan begrave ham, og Ingen skal vide det (cfr. 8, 13) — dette Heltemod blev Opgaven.  
This heroism of being willing to risk his life in so manifest a danger, which the story recalls once more — for Raguel says to Edna the morning after the wedding: send one of the maids and let her see whether he is alive, but if not, that I may bury him, and no one shall know it (cf. 8:13) — this heroism would be the theme.
> «Heltemod» — heroism; «Opgaven» — the task: «Heltemod» = heroic courage, valour (compounded «Helte-» + «Mod»). «Opgaven» = the task, problem, theme — the very word in this book's title «Problema». A poet, Kierkegaard says, would make Tobias's daring the whole subject. «vove» = to dare, risk; «øjensynlig» = manifest, evident; «begrave» = to bury. Raguel's grim instruction shows the danger was real.

Jeg tillader mig at foreslaae en anden.  
I take the liberty of proposing another.

Det er kjækt, og hehjertet og ridderligt handlet af Tobias, men enhver Mand, der ikke har Mod dertil, han er en Ærtekjelling, der hverken veed, hvad Kjærlighed er, eller hvad det er at være Mand, eller hvad det er Umagen værd at leve for, han har end ikke fattet det lille Mysterium, at det er bedre at give end at modtage, og har ingen Anelse om det store: at det er langt sværere at modtage end at give; det vil da sige, naar man har havt,Mod til at undvære og i Nødens Stund ikke blev feig.  
It is bravely, stout-heartedly, and chivalrously done by Tobias, but any man who has not the courage for it is a milksop who knows neither what love is, nor what it is to be a man, nor what is worth the trouble of living for; he has not even grasped the little mystery that it is better to give than to receive, and has no inkling of the great one: that it is far harder to receive than to give — that is, when one has had the courage to do without and in the hour of need did not turn coward.
> «Ærtekjelling» — milksop, weakling: «Ærtekjelling» is a vivid term of contempt — literally a 'pea-hag', i.e. a feeble, timid weakling, a milksop. «kjækt» = brave, plucky; «hehjertet» is a source misprint for «behjertet» (stout-hearted), kept verbatim; «ridderligt» = chivalrously. The deep claim Kierkegaard is preparing: «det er langt sværere at modtage end at give» — it is far harder to receive than to give.
> «at modtage» — to receive: The reversal of the proverb 'it is better to give than to receive' is the heart of this whole chunk: faith's hardest movement is to «modtage» (receive) — to take the finite back by virtue of the absurd. «undvære» = to do without, go without; «Nødens Stund» = the hour of need; «feig» = cowardly. The low comma «,Mod» is period quotation/printing style, kept verbatim.

Nei, Sara hun er Heltinde.  
No, Sara — she is the heroine.
> «Heltinde» — heroine: «Heltinde» = heroine (feminine of «Helt», hero). Kierkegaard overturns the expected reading: not the daring Tobias but the passive, doomed Sara is the true hero — because the harder movement is hers, to receive love and not hate the man she owes everything to. «Nei» = no (modern «nej»). The doubled subject «Sara hun» ('Sara, she') is an emphatic spoken-style construction.

Hende vil jeg nærme mig, som jeg aldrig har nærmet mig nogen Pige, eller følt mig fristet til i Tanken at nærme mig nogen, jeg har læst om.  
Her I will approach as I have never approached any girl, nor felt myself tempted in thought to approach anyone I have read about.

Thi hvilken Kjærlighed til Gud hører der dog ikke til, for at ville lade sig helbrede, naar man saaledes fra Begyndelsen af er forqvaklet uden Skyld, fra Begyndelsen af et forulykket Exemplar af et Menneske!  
For what love of God it takes, after all, to be willing to let oneself be healed, when one is thus from the very beginning botched through no fault of one's own — from the very beginning a ruined specimen of a human being!
> «forqvaklet» — botched, ruined: «forqvaklet» = bungled, deformed, spoiled (modern «forkvaklet», period «qv»). Sara's tragedy is that she is ruined «uden Skyld» (without guilt, through no fault of her own) — and yet must will to be healed. «hører … til» = is required, it takes; «hvilken … ikke» is exclamatory ('what love it takes…!'); «forulykket Exemplar» = ill-fated / wrecked specimen.

Hvilken ethisk Modenhed for at paatage sig det Ansvar, at tillade den Elskede et saadant Vovestykke!  
What ethical maturity, to take upon oneself the responsibility of permitting the beloved such a hazardous venture!
> «ethisk Modenhed» — ethical maturity: «Modenhed» = maturity, ripeness. To let Tobias risk his life for her demands of Sara not weakness but «ethisk Modenhed» — the ethical seriousness to bear «det Ansvar» (the responsibility). «det Ethiske» (the ethical) is this book's name for the universal. «paatage sig» = to take upon oneself; «Vovestykke» = a daring feat, hazardous venture.

Hvilken Ydmyghed ligeoverfor et andet Menneske!  
What humility before another human being!
> «Ydmyghed» — humility: «Ydmyghed» = humility, lowliness — the virtue Sara shows in accepting that another will stake his life for her. «ligeoverfor» = over against, in the face of, before (modern «lige over for»). These three exclamations (s68–70) name the inward greatness Kierkegaard sees in her: love of God, ethical maturity, humility.

Hvilken Tro til Gud, at hun ikke i næste Øieblik skulde hade den Mand, hvem hun skyldte Alt!  
What faith in God, that she would not in the next moment hate the man to whom she owed everything!
> «Tro» — faith: «Tro» (faith) is the supreme word of the whole book, and the climax of these exclamations. Sara's faith is that she will not «hade» (hate) her rescuer — for to owe everything to another is the hardest thing to bear without resentment. «skyldte Alt» = owed everything; «Øieblik» = moment (modern «øjeblik»); «skulde» = should, would. This sets up the demonic alternative explored next.

Lad Sara være en Mand, og det Dæmoniske ligger lige ved Haanden.  
Let Sara be a man, and the demonic lies close at hand.
> «det Dæmoniske» — the demonic: «det Dæmoniske» (the demonic) is, for Kierkegaard, the self that shuts itself up («det Indesluttede») in proud refusal — here, the refusal to be helped, to owe everything to another. Were Sara a proud man, that refusal would be «lige ved Haanden» (close at hand). The next sentences unfold why a proud nature cannot endure pity. «Lad … være» = let … be.

Den stolte, ædle Natur kan taale Alt, men een Ting kan den ikke taale, den kan ikke taale Medlidenhed.  
The proud, noble nature can bear everything, but one thing it cannot bear: it cannot bear pity.
> «Medlidenhed» — pity, compassion: «Medlidenhed» = pity, com-passion (literally 'suffering-with'). The proud nature can endure anything but this, because pity casts it as a helpless object. «taale» = to bear, endure, tolerate; «ædle» = noble; «een» (one) is doubled for emphasis. This is the demonic temptation Sara, as a woman of faith, overcomes.

Der ligger en Krænkelse deri, som kun kan tilføjes ham af en højere Magt; thi ved sig selv kan han aldrig blive Gjenstand derfor.  
There lies in it an affront that can be inflicted on him only by a higher power; for by himself he can never become an object of it.
> «Krænkelse» — affront, offence: «Krænkelse» = an affront, violation, offence to one's dignity — pity wounds the proud man like an insult. Only «en højere Magt» (a higher power) can place him in that humiliating position, since he would never make himself an object of pity. «tilføjes» = be inflicted; «Gjenstand» = object (with period «Gj»); «derfor» = of/for it.

Har han syndet, da kan han bære Straffen, uden at fortvivle, men det uden Skyld fra Modersliv at være udseet til Offer for Medlidenheden, en sød Lugt i dens Næse, det kan han ikke udholde.  
If he has sinned, then he can bear the punishment without despairing; but to be, without guilt, from the mother's womb singled out as a victim for pity, a sweet savour in its nostrils — that he cannot endure.
> «fortvivle» — to despair: «fortvivle» = to despair (noun «Fortvivlelse», the theme of Kierkegaard's later The Sickness unto Death). The proud man can bear deserved punishment without despair; what crushes him is to be «udseet til Offer for Medlidenheden» (singled out as pity's victim) through no fault of his own. «fra Modersliv» = from the mother's womb; «en sød Lugt i dens Næse» echoes the biblical 'a sweet savour'.

Medlidenhed har en besynderlig Dialektik, den fordrer i det ene Øieblik Skyld, i det næste vil den ikke have det, og derfor bliver det, at være prædestineret til Medlidenhed, forfærdeligere og forfærdeligere, jo mere Individets Ulykke er i Retning af det Aandelige.  
Pity has a strange dialectic: in one moment it demands guilt, in the next it will not have it; and therefore to be predestined for pity becomes more and more dreadful, the more the individual's misfortune lies in the direction of the spiritual.
> «Dialektik» — dialectic: «Dialektik» = dialectic — the way a concept contradicts itself in its own movement. Pity's dialectic is that it both wants and refuses guilt in its object, and so torments most where the «Ulykke» (misfortune) is most «aandelig» (spiritual). «besynderlig» = strange, peculiar; «prædestineret» = predestined; «forfærdeligere og forfærdeligere» = more and more dreadful; «det Aandelige» = the spiritual.

Men Sara har ingen Skyld, hun er henkastet som et Rov for alle Lidelser og skal dertil endnu martres af Menneskenes Medlidenhed, thi endogsaa jeg, der dog beundrer hende mere end Tobias elskede hende, endogsaa jeg kan ikke nævne hendes Navn uden at sige: den stakkels Pige.  
But Sara has no guilt; she is flung down as a prey to all sufferings, and on top of that is still to be tormented by people's pity — for even I, who do admire her more than Tobias loved her, even I cannot name her name without saying: the poor girl.
> «henkastet som et Rov» — flung down as a prey: «henkastet» = thrown down, cast aside; «Rov» = prey, plunder, spoil. Sara is innocent yet abandoned as «et Rov for alle Lidelser» (a prey to all sufferings). The final irony closes the passage: even Kierkegaard, her great admirer, cannot help pitying her — «den stakkels Pige» (the poor girl) — the very pity the demonic nature could not endure. «martres» = be tortured; «endogsaa» = even.

Lad en Mand være i Sares Sted, lad ham vide, at dersom han vil elske en Pige, da kommer en Helvedes Aand og myrder den Elskede i Bryllupsnatten, da var det vel muligt, at han valgte det Dæmoniske; han lukkede sig inde i sig selv, og sagde paa den Maade, som en dæmonisk Natur taler i Løndom: ,Tak, jeg er ingen Ven af Ceremonier og Vidtløftigheder, jeg forlanger aldeles ikke Kjærlighedens Lyst, jeg kan jo blive en Blaubart, der har min Fryd af at see Pigerne segne i Bryllupsnatten.”"  
Put a man in Sarah's place, let him know that if he will love a girl, then a spirit out of hell comes and murders the beloved on the wedding night — then it might well be that he chose the demonic; he shut himself up within himself, and said in the manner in which a demonic nature speaks in secret: "Thanks, I am no friend of ceremonies and prolixities, I demand love's pleasure not at all, I can become a Bluebeard who takes his delight in seeing the girls sink down on the wedding night."
> det Dæmoniske — the demonic: «det Dæmoniske» (the demonic) is, for Kierkegaard, one of the two ways a person set outside «det Almene» (the universal) can go: shutting oneself up «i Løndom» (in secrecy) against God and others, the dark counterpart to faith's hiddenness. Note period spellings «Aand» (spirit; modern «ånd»), «Kjærlighedens» (love's; modern «kærlighedens»), and «see» (to see; modern «se»). «Blaubart» is German for Bluebeard.

Man faaer i Almindelighed meget lidet at vide om det Dæmoniske, uagtet dette Gebeet netop i vor Tid har et gyldigt Krav paa at opdages, og uagtet Iagttageren, naar han ellers forstaaer at sætte sig lidt i Rapport til Dæmonen, næsten kan bruge ethvert Menneske i det mindste momentviis.  
In general one gets to know very little about the demonic, even though this domain has, precisely in our age, a valid claim to be discovered, and even though the observer, when he otherwise knows how to put himself a little into rapport with the demon, can use almost every human being, at least momentarily.
> uagtet — although: «uagtet» (although, notwithstanding) is a formal concessive conjunction, repeated here to weigh two reasons the demonic deserves study. Period orthography: «faaer» (gets; modern «får»), «forstaaer» (understands; modern «forstår»), «momentviis» (momentarily; modern «momentvis»). «Gebeet» is a Germanism for domain/territory (German «Gebiet»).

Shakespeare er og bliver bestandig i denne Retning en Heros.  
Shakespeare is and remains forever, in this direction, a hero.

Hiin rædsomme Dæmon, den mest dæmoniske Figur, som Shakespeare har skildret, men ogsaa skildret magesløs: Gloster (siden Richard den Tredie) hvad gjorde ham til Dæmon?  
That dreadful demon, the most demonic figure Shakespeare has depicted — but depicted incomparably: Gloster (later Richard the Third) — what made him into a demon?
> Hiin — that (yonder): «Hiin» (that, yonder) is an emphatic demonstrative, more pointed than «den», marking a figure already present to the mind. Note that «gjorde» (past tense of «gøre», to do/make) has no «j» in either period or modern Danish — the «j» appears in the infinitive form «gjøre» (modern «gøre»), not in the past tense. And «magesløs» = matchless, incomparable.

Aabenbar det, at han ikke kunde bære Medlidenhed, som han fra Barn af var priisgiven til.  
Plainly this: that he could not bear the pity to which he had been given over from childhood.

Hans Monolog i iste Akt af Richard den Tredie er mere værd end hele Moralsystemer, der ingen Anelse have om Tilværelsens Rædsler eller om Forklaringen.  
His monologue in the first act of Richard the Third is worth more than whole systems of morals that have no inkling of existence's horrors or of the explanation.
> Tilværelsen — existence: «Tilværelsen» (existence, being-here) is a recurring Kierkegaardian word for the whole of lived reality. The older plural «have» (have; modern «har») agrees with «Moralsystemer», and «iste» is the period abbreviation for «1ste» (first).

. Ich, roh geprågt, und aller Reize baar.  
I, roughly stamped, and bare of all charms.

Vor leicht sich dreh'nden Nymphen mich zu briåsten; Ich, so verktirzt um schånes Ebenmass, Geschåndet von der tåckischen Natur, Entstellt, verwahrlost, vor der Zeit gesandt In diese Welt des Athmens, halb kaum fertig Gemacht, und zwar so lahm und ungeziemend, Dass Hunde bellen, hink” ich wo vorbei.  
Before the lightly turning nymphs to strut; I, so curtailed of fair proportion, cheated of feature by deceitful nature, deformed, neglected, sent before my time into this world of breathing, scarce half made up — and that so lamely and unfashionably that dogs bark at me as I halt by them.

Saadanne Naturer som Glosters kan man ikke frelse ved at mediere dem ind i en Samfunds Idee.  
Such natures as Gloster's one cannot save by mediating them into an idea of society.
> mediere — to mediate (Hegel): «mediere» (to mediate) is the Hegelian operation — resolving the particular into the universal — that «Frygt og Bæven» repeatedly denies for faith and, here, for the demonic individual. «Samfunds Idee» (idea of society) is just such a universal that cannot absorb a Gloster.

Ethiken gjør egentlig kun Nar ad dem, som det jo vilde være en Spot over Sara, hvis den vilde sige til hende, hvorfor udtrykker Du ikke det Almene og gifter Dig.  
Ethics really only makes a fool of them, just as it would be a mockery of Sarah if it were to say to her: why do you not express the universal and marry?
> det Almene — the universal: «det Almene» (the universal) is the sphere of «Ethiken» (ethics): what everyone is bound to and can be measured by. To "express the universal" by marrying is precisely what the demonic and the knight of faith cannot simply do. Note period spelling «Ethiken» (with «th») and «gjør» (does/makes).

Saadanne Naturer ere fra Grunden af i Paradoxet, og de ere ingenlunde ufuldkomnere end andre Mennesker, kun at de enten fortabes i det dæmoniske Paradox eller frelses i det guddommelige.  
Such natures are from the ground up in the paradox, and they are by no means more imperfect than other people, only that they are either lost in the demonic paradox or saved in the divine.
> Paradoxet — the paradox: «Paradoxet» (the paradox) is the book's central term: the single individual placed outside «det Almene» (the universal). Kierkegaard's sharp either/or here — «fortabes» (be lost) in the demonic or «frelses» (be saved) in the divine — splits one structural position into two destinies. The older plural verb «ere» (are; modern «er») is period usage.

Man har nu Tid ud og Tid ind glædet sig ved, at Hexe, Nisser, Trolde o. s. v. vare Vanskabninger, og det er unegteligt, at ethvert Menneske har en Tilbøielighed til, naar han seer en Vanskabning, strax at knytte Forestillingen dertil om en moralsk Depravation.  
Time out of mind people have taken pleasure in the fact that witches, goblins, trolls, and so on were misshapen creatures, and it is undeniable that every human being has an inclination, when he sees a deformed creature, to attach at once to it the notion of a moral depravation.
> vare — were (older plural): «vare» is the older plural past of «være» (to be), agreeing with «Hexe, Nisser, Trolde» (witches, goblins, trolls); modern Danish uses «var» throughout. Period spellings here: «Hexe» (modern «hekse»), «unegteligt» (undeniably), «Tilbøielighed» (inclination; modern «tilbøjelighed»), «seer» (sees).

Hvilken uhyre Uretfærdighed, da Forholdet snarere maa vendes om, at Tilværelsen selv har fordærvet dem, saaledes som en Stedmoder gjør Børnene vanartede.  
What monstrous injustice, since the relation must rather be turned around — that existence itself has corrupted them, just as a stepmother makes the children turn out badly.

Det oprindeligt ved Natur eller Historie-Forhold at være sat uden for det Almene, det er Begyndelsen til det Dæmoniske, som Individet dog selv ikke har Skyld i.  
To be originally set, by nature or by a circumstance of history, outside the universal — that is the beginning of the demonic, for which the individual nevertheless is not himself to blame.

Cumberlands Jøden er saaledes ogsaa en Dæmon, om han end gjør det Gode.  
Cumberland's Jew is thus likewise a demon, even though he does good.

Saaledes kan det Dæmoniske ogsaa yttre. sig som Foragt for Mennesker, en Foragt, der dog vel at mærke ikke bringer den Dæmoniske selv til at handle foragteligt, tværtimod har han sin Styrke i at vide, at han er bedre end Alle, som dømme ham.  
Thus the demonic can also express itself as contempt for human beings — a contempt that, mark well, does not bring the demonic person himself to act contemptibly; on the contrary, he has his strength in knowing that he is better than all who judge him.
> yttre sig — to express itself: «yttre sig» (to express/manifest itself; modern «ytre sig») is reflexive. The stray period after «yttre» reproduces a typesetting/OCR break in the source. Note older plural «dømme» (judge; modern «dømmer») agreeing with «Alle».

— Angaaende alt Sligt burde Digteren nærmest først gjøre Allarm.  
— Concerning all such things, the poet ought first of all to raise the alarm.

Gud veed hvilke Skrifter de nu levende yngre Versemagere læse!  
God knows what writings the younger verse-makers now living read!
> veed — knows: «veed» is the period spelling of «ved» (knows), with the doubled vowel marking the long sound. «Versemagere» (verse-makers) is faintly dismissive — rhymesters rather than poets. Older plural «læse» (read; modern «læser») agrees with the plural subject.

Deres Studium bestaaer nok i at lære Riim udenad.  
Their study probably consists in learning rhymes by heart.

- Gud veed, hvad deres Betydning er i Tilværelsen!  
— God knows what their significance is in existence!

I dette Øieblik veed jeg ikke, de gjøre anden Nytte, end at de føre et opbyggeligt Beviis for Sjælens Udødelighed, idet man trøstig kan sige om dem til sig selv, hvad Baggesen siger om Byens Digter Kildevalle: blir han udødelig, saa blive vi det Alle.  
At this moment I do not know that they do any other good than that they furnish an edifying proof of the soul's immortality, in that one can say comfortingly of them to oneself what Baggesen says of the town's poet Kildevalle: if he becomes immortal, then so do we all.

— Hvad her er sagt i Anledning af Sara nærmest i Retning af digterisk Frembringelse og derfor med en phantastisk Forudsætning, har sin fulde Betydning, naar man med psychologisk Interesse vilde fordybe sig i Betydningen af den gamle Sætning: nullum unquam exstitit magnum ingenium sine aliqua dementia.  
— What has here been said in connection with Sarah, chiefly in the direction of poetic production and therefore with a fantastic presupposition, has its full significance when, with psychological interest, one would immerse oneself in the meaning of the old maxim: nullum unquam exstitit magnum ingenium sine aliqua dementia.

Thi denne Dementia er Geniets Liden i Tilværelsen, er Udtrykket for, om jeg saa tør sige, den guddommelige Misundelse, medens det Geniale er Forkjærlighedens Udtryk.  
For this dementia is the genius's suffering in existence, is the expression of, if I may so put it, the divine envy, while the genial is the expression of a divine preference.
> Thi — for: «Thi» (for, because) is an archaic causal conjunction Kierkegaard favors to open an explanatory sentence; modern Danish uses «for». «Liden» here is the noun "suffering" (related to «lide», to suffer), not the adjective "little". Period spelling «Forkjærlighedens» (preference's; modern «forkærlighedens»).

Saaledes er Geniet fra Begyndelsen af desorienteret i Forhold til det Almene, og bragt i Forhold til Paradoxet, hvad enten han i Fortvivlelse over sin Grændse, der i hans Øine forvandler hans Almagt til Afmagt, søger en dæmonisk Beroligelse, og derfor ikke vil vedgaae det hverken for Gud eller Mennesker, eller han religieus beroliger sig i Kjærlighed til Guddommen.  
Thus the genius is from the beginning disoriented in relation to the universal, and brought into relation with the paradox — whether, in despair over his limit, which in his eyes transforms his omnipotence into impotence, he seeks a demonic reassurance and therefore will not acknowledge it before either God or human beings, or he reassures himself religiously in love for the Deity.
> Fortvivlelse — despair: «Fortvivlelse» (despair) is a central Kierkegaardian word (later the subject of «Sygdommen til Døden», The Sickness unto Death). The same either/or recurs: a «dæmonisk Beroligelse» (demonic reassurance) versus reassurance «religieus» (religiously). Period spellings: «Grændse» (limit; modern «grænse»), «Øine» (eyes), «vedgaae» (acknowledge; modern «vedgå»).

Her ligge psychologiske Opgaver, som man med Glæde, synes mig, kunde offre et heelt Liv paa, og dog hører man saa sjeldent et Ord derom.  
Here lie psychological tasks on which, with joy, it seems to me, one could sacrifice a whole life — and yet one hears so seldom a word about them.

I hvilket Forhold staaer Sindssvagheden til Genialiteten, kan man construere den ene ud af den anden; i hvilken Forstand og hvorvidt er Geniet Herre over sin Sindssvaghed; thi det følger af sig selv, at han til en vis Grad er Herre over det, da han jo ellers virkelig var sindssvag.  
In what relation does madness stand to genius — can one construct the one out of the other? In what sense and how far is the genius master over his madness? For it follows of itself that to a certain degree he is master over it, since otherwise he really would be insane.
> Sindssvaghed — madness: «Sindssvaghed» (literally weakness of mind: madness, insanity) is the Danish standing in for the Latin «dementia». Kierkegaard frames it as something the genius is partly «Herre over» (master over). «construere» is the Hegelian term for deriving one thing from another; «staaer» is period spelling of «står» (stands).

'Til saadanne Iagttagelser hører imidlertid Snildhed i høj Grad og Kjærlighed; thi at iagttage den Overlegne er saare vanskeligt.  
To such observations, however, there belongs cunning in a high degree, and love; for to observe the superior person is exceedingly difficult.
> saare — exceedingly: «saare» is an archaic intensifier ("very, exceedingly"), now obsolete in modern Danish. The stray leading apostrophe before «Til» reproduces an OCR/typesetting artifact in the source. «Iagttagelser» (observations) and «iagttage» (to observe) recur as Kierkegaard's word for sympathetic psychological watching.

Naar man med Opmærksomhed herpaa vilde gjennemlæse enkelte af de mest geniale Forfattere, var det dog maaskee muligt, en ganske enkelt Gang om end med megen Møije at opdage Lidt.  
If with attention to this one would read through certain of the most genial authors, it might nevertheless perhaps be possible, just a single time and though with much trouble, to discover a little.

Endnu et Tilfælde vil jeg tænke mig, at en Enkelt ved at være skjult og ved sin Taushed vil frelse det Almene.  
Yet one more case I will imagine: that a single individual, by being hidden and by his silence, would save the universal.
> skjult — hidden: «skjult» (hidden) keeps the period «kj» cluster (modern «skjult» is unchanged in spelling but the word, with «Taushed», silence, names the book's theme of concealment). «en Enkelt» / «den Enkelte» (the single individual) versus «det Almene» (the universal) is the governing opposition of «Frygt og Bæven».

Dertil kan jeg bruge Sagnet om Faust.  
For this I can use the legend of Faust.

Faust er en Tvivler"), en Aandens Apostat, der gaaer Kjødets ”) Vil man ikke bruge en Tvivler, kunde man vælge en lignende Figur, en Ironiker f. Ex., hvis skarpe Blik fra Grunden af har opdaget Tilværelsens Latterlighed, hvem en hemmelig Forstaaelse med Kræfterne i Livet forvisser om hvad Patienten ønsker.  
Faust is a doubter, an apostate of the spirit who takes the way of the flesh. (If one does not wish to use a doubter, one could choose a similar figure — an ironist, for example, whose sharp gaze has discovered from the ground up the ridiculousness of existence, whom a secret understanding with the forces in life assures of what the patient wishes.)
> Tvivler — doubter: «Tvivler» (doubter) is Kierkegaard's chosen Faust: doubt, not lust, defines him. The footnote marks «")» and «”)» have folded into the running text in this source, splicing the main sentence with its note about substituting an «Ironiker» (ironist) — preserved verbatim. «Aandens Apostat» = apostate of the spirit; «Kjødets» (the flesh's) keeps period «Kj».

Han veed, at han har Latterens Magt, hvis han vil bruge den, han er sikker paa sin Seier, ja hvad mere er paa sin Lykke.  
He knows that he has the power of laughter, if he will use it; he is sure of his victory, indeed — what is more — of his good fortune.

Han veed, der vil opløfte sig en enkelt Stemme, der vil holde igjen, men han veed, han er stærkere, han veed, at man endnu et Øieblik kan bringe Mændene til at synes alvorlige, men han veed ogsaa, at de i Smug længes efter at lee med ham; han veed, at man endnu et Øieblik kan bringe Qvinden til at holde Viften for Øinene, naar han taler, men han veed, at hun leer bag ved Viften, han veed, at Viften er ikke absolut ugjennemsigtig, han veed, at man kan skrive en usynlig Skrift paa den, han veed, at naar en Qvinde slaaer efter ham med Viften, da er det fordi hun har forstaaet ham, han veed ubedragelig Besked om, hvorledes Latteren sniger sig ind og boer skjult i et Menneske, og naar den engang har taget Bolig, sidder paa Luur og venter.  
He knows that a single voice will raise itself to hold back, but he knows he is stronger; he knows that for a moment longer one can bring the men to seem grave, but he knows too that in secret they long to laugh with him; he knows that for a moment longer one can bring the woman to hold the fan before her eyes when he speaks, but he knows that she laughs behind the fan, he knows that the fan is not absolutely opaque, he knows that one can write an invisible script upon it, he knows that when a woman strikes at him with the fan it is because she has understood him, he knows undeceivably how laughter creeps in and dwells hidden in a person, and, once it has taken up lodging, lies in wait and waits.
> "han veed" — anaphora of knowing: Kierkegaard piles clause on clause with «han veed» (he knows), a breathless anaphora building the ironist's total command of laughter. Period spellings throughout: «Qvinden» (the woman; modern «kvinden»), «lee/leer» (laugh/laughs), «boer» (dwells; modern «bor»), «Luur» (lurk/watch; modern «lur»), «ugjennemsigtig» (opaque).

Lad os tænke os en saadan Aristophanes, en saadan Voltaire lidt forandret; thi han er tillige en sympathetisk Natur, han elsker Tilværelsen, han elsker Menneskene og han veed, at om end Latterens Fordømmelse maaskee vil opdrage en frelst ung Slægt, saa vil der i den samtidige gaae en Mængde Mennesker til Grunde.  
Let us imagine such an Aristophanes, such a Voltaire, a little altered; for he is at the same time a sympathetic nature, he loves existence, he loves human beings, and he knows that, though the condemnation of laughter may perhaps raise up a saved young generation, yet in the contemporary one a multitude of people will be ruined.
> sympathetisk Natur — sympathetic nature: «sympathetisk Natur» (sympathetic nature) is the key qualification Kierkegaard adds to his Faust/ironist: one who loves «Tilværelsen» (existence) and so suffers from the destructive power he could unleash. Period spelling keeps Greek «th» in «sympathetisk»; «gaae til Grunde» = to be ruined/perish.

Han tier da, og glemmer saavidt muligt selv at lee.  
He keeps silent, then, and forgets, as far as possible, to laugh himself.
> tie / tier — to be silent: «tie» (to be silent), here «han tier» (he keeps silent), is the verb at the heart of «Frygt og Bæven» (and of its pseudonym, Johannes de silentio — John of the silence). Silence versus speech is the ethical crux: ethics demands disclosure, the hidden individual withholds it.

Men tør han tie.  
But dare he keep silent?

Maaskee er der Adskillige, der slet ikke forstaae den Vanskelighed, om hvilken jeg taler.  
Perhaps there are several who do not at all understand the difficulty of which I speak.

De mene nok, at det var en beundringsværdig Højimodighed at tie.  
They probably think it was an admirable high-mindedness to keep silent.
> Høimodighed — high-mindedness: «Høimodighed» (high-mindedness, magnanimity; spelled «Højimodighed» here) is a recurring word Kierkegaard tests: merely aesthetic or ethical magnanimity is not yet faith. Note period «øi/øj» variation (the same word appears as «Høimodighed» and «Højimodighed» in the source); modern «højmodighed».

Dette er slet ikke min Mening, thi jeg mener, at enhver saadan Natur, hvis han ikke har havt Høimod til at tie, er en Forræder mod Gang.  
This is not at all my view; for I hold that every such nature, if he has not had the high-mindedness to keep silent, is a traitor against the cause.

Dette er Digternes Mening, og medens det atter og atter gjentages, at hver Tid har sin Faust, gaaer dog dens ene Digter efter den anden ufortrøden hen ad den slagne Landevei.  
This is the poets' view, and while it is repeated again and again that every age has its Faust, yet one poet after another of the age goes undaunted along the beaten highroad.

Lad os foretage en lille Forandring.  
Let us make a little alteration.

Faust er Tvivleren xar'soynv; men han er en sympathetisk Natur.  
Faust is the doubter par excellence; but he is a sympathetic nature.

Selv i Goethes Opfattelse af Faust savner jeg et dybere psychologisk Indblik i: Tvivlens hemmelige Samtaler med sig selv.  
Even in Goethe's conception of Faust I miss a deeper psychological insight into the secret conversations of doubt with itself.

I vor Tid, da jo Alle have oplevet Tvivlen, har endnu ingen Digter gjort noget Skridt dertil.  
In our age, when after all everyone has experienced doubt, no poet has yet taken a step toward it.
> have — have (older plural): «have» is the older plural present of «at have» (to have), agreeing with «Alle» (everyone, treated as plural); modern Danish uses «har». The line gibes at the age's fashionable claim that "everyone has gone beyond doubt."

Jeg tænker da ogsaa, at jeg gjerne kunde byde dem kongelige Obligationer at skrive paa, for at skrive alt det Meget, de i denne Henseende have oplevet — de skrev neppe mere end hvad der kunde rummes paa den forreste Margen.  
I imagine, therefore, that I might well offer them royal bonds to write on, to write all the great deal they have experienced in this respect — they would scarcely write more than could be contained on the front margin.

Kun naar man saaledes bøjer Faust ind i sig selv, kun da kan Tvivlen tage sig poetisk ud, kun da opdager han egentligt ogsaa selv i Virkeligheden alle dens Lidelser.  
Only when one thus bends Faust into himself, only then can doubt take on a poetic look, only then does he himself also really discover, in actuality, all its sufferings.

Han veed da, at det er Aanden, der bærer Tilværelsen, men han veed ogsaa, at den Tryghed og Glæde, i hvilken Menneskene leve, ikke er grundet i Aandens Magt, men let forklarlig som er ureflekteret Lyksalighed.  
He knows then that it is spirit that bears existence, but he knows too that the security and joy in which human beings live is not grounded in the power of spirit, but is easily explicable as an unreflected blessedness.
> Aanden — spirit: «Aanden» (spirit; modern «ånden») is the doubter's burden: he sees that spirit bears «Tilværelsen» (existence), while ordinary security rests on «ureflekteret Lyksalighed» (unreflected blessedness). «som er» appears to be a slip for «som en» (as an) — "easily explicable as an unreflected blessedness."

Som Tvivler, som Tvivleren er han høiere end alt dette, og om Nogen vil bedrage ved at indbilde ham, at han har gjennemgaaet Tvivlen, saa gjennemskuer han det let; thi den, der har gjort en Bevægelse i Aandens Verden, altsaa en uendelig Bevægelse, han kan strax Tilværelsen.  
As a doubter, as the doubter, he is higher than all this, and if anyone would deceive by making him believe that he has gone through doubt, he sees through it easily; for one who has made a movement in the world of spirit — that is, an infinite movement — he can at once [grasp] existence.
> uendelig Bevægelse — infinite movement: «uendelig Bevægelse» (infinite movement) is the technical term of «Frygt og Bæven» for the inward act (resignation, then faith) made «i Aandens Verden» (in the world of spirit). The final clause «han kan strax Tilværelsen» is elliptical/defective in the source (a verb such as "grasp/see through" is missing) — left verbatim.

Jeg fordrer da altsaa denne Høimodighed af ham; men naar han har den, tør han saa tie.  
I therefore demand this high-mindedness of him; but when he has it, dare he then keep silent?

Ethiken er en farlig Videnskab, og det var vel muligt, at Aristophanes, bestemmet reen ethisk, har besluttet sig til at lade Latteren dømme den forvildede Tid.  
Ethics is a dangerous science, and it might well be that Aristophanes, determined purely ethically, had resolved to let laughter judge the misguided age.
> det Ethiske — the ethical: «Ethiken» (ethics; period spelling with «th») is "a dangerous science" because its demand for disclosure may itself license a destructive judgment. «reen ethisk» (purely ethically) keeps the period doubling «reen» (modern «ren», pure); «bestemmet» = determined.

Æsthetisk Høimod kan ikke hjælpe; thi paa den Conto vover man ikke Sligt.  
Aesthetic high-mindedness cannot help; for on that account one does not venture such a thing.

Skal han tie, saa maa han ind i Paradoxet.  
If he is to keep silent, then he must go into the paradox.

— Endnu et Anlæg vil jeg antyde, at f. Ex. et Menneske eier en Forklaring af en Heros's Liv, der paa en sørgelig Maade forklarer dette, og dog hviler en heel Samtid absolut trygt i denne Heros, uden at ane noget Saadant.  
— One more configuration I will indicate: that, for example, a person possesses an explanation of a hero's life which explains it in a sorrowful way, and yet a whole age rests absolutely secure in this hero, without suspecting anything of the kind.
> Anlæg — configuration / design: «Anlæg» here means a (dramatic/psychological) setup or configuration — Kierkegaard's word for the experimental cases he keeps sketching. Period spellings: «eier» (owns; modern «ejer»), «heel» (whole; modern «hel»), «Heros» (hero, from Greek).

gjennemhøre Repliken, om det er en forsøgt Mand, der taler, eller en Minchhausen.  
to hear through the line, whether it is a tried-and-tested man who speaks, or a Münchhausen.

Hvad en Tamerlan formaaer med sine Hunner, det veed Faust han formaaer med sin Tvivl, — at skrække Menneskene forfærdede op, at lade Tilværelsen vakle under deres Fødder, at splitte Menneskene ad, at bringe Angestens Skrig overalt til at lyde.  
What a Tamerlane can do with his Huns, that Faust knows he can do with his doubt — to startle people up in terror, to let existence totter beneath their feet, to scatter people asunder, to make the cry of anxiety sound everywhere.
> Angest — anxiety / dread: «Angest» (anxiety, dread; modern «angst») is the great Kierkegaardian term, given its own book in «Begrebet Angest» (The Concept of Anxiety, 1844). Here Faust's doubt could make «Angestens Skrig» (the cry of anxiety) sound everywhere — the destructive power his sympathy restrains. «formaaer» = is able to (modern «formår»).

Og hvis han gjør det, da er han dog ingen Tamerlan, han. er i en vis Forstand bemyndiget og har Tankens Bemyndigelse.  
And if he does it, then he is nevertheless no Tamerlane; he is in a certain sense authorized and has the authorization of thought.

Men Faust er en sympathetisk Natur, han elsker Tilværelsen, hans Sjæl kjender ingen Misundelse, han indseer, han. kan ikke standse den Rasen, han vel kan vække, han attraaer ingen herostratisk Ære — han tier, han skjuler Tvivlen omhyggeligere i sin Sjæl, end den Pige, der skjuler en syndig Kjærligheds Frugt under sit Hjerte, han søger saa godt som muligt at gaae i Tridt med andre Mennesker, men hvad der foregaaer i ham, det fortærer han i sig selv, og saaledes bringer han sig selv som et Offer for det Almene.  
But Faust is a sympathetic nature, he loves existence, his soul knows no envy, he sees that he cannot stop the frenzy he could well awaken, he craves no Herostratic fame — he keeps silent, he hides the doubt in his soul more carefully than the girl who hides the fruit of a sinful love beneath her heart, he tries as best he can to walk in step with other people, but what goes on within him he consumes within himself, and thus he brings himself as a sacrifice for the universal.
> Offer — sacrifice for the universal: Faust's silent self-consumption makes him «et Offer for det Almene» (a sacrifice for the universal): he conceals his doubt to spare the age, suffering inwardly. «herostratisk Ære» = the infamous fame of Herostratus (who burned the temple of Artemis for notoriety). Period spellings: «attraaer» (craves; modern «attrår»), «Tridt» (step; modern «trit»), «kjender» (knows).

Man kan stundom høre Menneskene klage, naar et excentrisk Hoved reiser Tvivlens Hvirvel, de sige da: gid han havde tiet.  
One can sometimes hear people complain, when an eccentric head raises the whirlwind of doubt; they say then: would that he had kept silent.

Denne Idee realiserer Faust.  
This idea Faust realizes.

Den, der har Forestilling om, hvad det vil sige, at et Menneske lever af Aand, han veed ogsaa, hvad Tvivlens Hunger vil sige, og at Tvivleren hungrer ligesaa meget efter Livets daglige Brød som efter Aandens Næring.  
Whoever has a notion of what it means that a person lives by spirit, he also knows what the hunger of doubt means, and that the doubter hungers just as much for life's daily bread as for the nourishment of spirit.

Uagtet da al den Smerte, Faust lider, kan være et ret godt AÅrgument for, at det ikke er Stolthed, der har besat ham, saa skal jeg dog bruge et lille Forsigtigheds Middel, som jeg let opfinder; thi som Gregorius Rimini blev kaldet tortor infantium, fordi han antog de smaa Børns Fordømmelse, saaledes kunde jeg fristes til at kalde mig selv: tortor heroum; thi jeg er meget opfindsom, naar det gjælder om at pine Heltene.  
Although, then, all the pain Faust suffers may be a fairly good argument that it is not pride which has possessed him, yet I shall use a little precautionary means that I readily invent; for as Gregory of Rimini was called tortor infantium because he held to the damnation of little children, so I might be tempted to call myself tortor heroum; for I am very inventive when it comes to torturing the heroes.

Faust seer Margrete, ikke efter at han har valgt Lysten; thi min Faust vælger slet ikke Lysten, han seer Margrete ikke i Mephistopheles's Huulspeil, men i al hendes elskelige Uskyld, og da hans Sjæl har bevaret Kjærligheden til Mennesker, kan han ogsaa meget godt forelske sig i hende.  
Faust sees Margarete, not after he has chosen lust; for my Faust does not choose lust at all, he sees Margarete not in Mephistopheles's concave mirror, but in all her lovely innocence, and since his soul has preserved its love for human beings, he can also very well fall in love with her.
> Huulspeil — concave mirror: «Huulspeil» (concave/distorting mirror; modern «hulspejl») is the lens of Mephistopheles, through which a woman appears only as an object of «Lysten» (lust). Kierkegaard's Faust refuses it, seeing Margarete in «Uskyld» (innocence). Period spellings: «seer» (sees), «Kjærligheden» (love).

Men han er Tvivler, hans Tvivl har tilintetgjort ham Virkeligheden; thi saa ideal er min Faust, at han ikke hører til disse videnskabelige Tvivlere, der tvivle een Time i hvert Semester paa Kathederet, men forøvrigt kunne gjøre alt Andet, som da ogsaa dette uden Aandens Tilstand eller i Kraft af Aand.  
But he is a doubter, his doubt has annihilated reality for him; for so ideal is my Faust that he does not belong to those scholarly doubters who doubt for one hour each semester at the lectern, but otherwise can do everything else — as indeed they also do this — without the state of spirit or by virtue of spirit.
> tilintetgjort — annihilated: «tilintetgjort» (annihilated, reduced to nothing; modern «tilintetgjort») keeps the period «gj». Older plurals «tvivle» (doubt) and «kunne» (can) agree with the plural «Tvivlere». «Katheder» (lectern) keeps the Greek-Latin «th»; the gibe targets merely «videnskabelige» (academic) doubt.

Han er Tvivler, og Tvivleren hungrer ligesaa meget efter Glædens daglige Brød, som efter Aandens Føde.  
He is a doubter, and the doubter hungers just as much for joy's daily bread as for the nourishment of spirit.

Dog bliver han sin Beslutning tro og tier, og taler ikke til noget Menneske om sin Tvivl, og til Margrele heller ikke om sin Kjærlighed.  
Yet he remains true to his resolve and keeps silent, and speaks to no human being of his doubt, and to Margarete not even of his love.

Det følger af sig selv, at Faust er for ideal en Figur til at lade sig nøje med den Passiar, at naar han talte, saa vilde han foranledige en almindelig Discussion, . eller det Hele vilde gaae af uden Følge, eller maaskee, ellev maaskee.  
It follows of itself that Faust is too ideal a figure to content himself with the chatter that, if he spoke, he would occasion a general discussion, — or that the whole thing would pass off without consequence, or perhaps, or perhaps.
> Passiar — idle chatter: «Passiar» (idle talk, chatter) names the trivial reassurances Faust is too serious to settle for. The trailing «eller maaskee, ellev maaskee» ("or perhaps, or perhaps" — «ellev» an OCR slip for «eller») mimics the chatter's empty drift; the stray period after «Discussion» is a typesetting artifact, all kept verbatim.

(Her slumrer, som enhver Digter let vil see, det Comiske i Anlægget, ved at bringe Faust i et ironisk Forhold til disse lavcomiske Gjække, der i vor Tid løbe efter Tvivlen, føre et udvortes Argument for, at de virkelig have tvivlet, f. Ex. en Doctor-Attest, eller bande paa, at de have tvivlet om Alt, eller bevise det deraf, at de paa deres Reise traf sammen med en Tvivler, disse Iilbud og Hurtigløbere i Aandens Verden, der i største Hast hos eet Menneske faaer et lille Nys om Tvivlen, hos en anden om Troen, og nu wirthschafte paa bedste Maade, alt eftersom Menigheden vil have fiint Sand eller grovt Sand).  
(Here, as every poet will easily see, slumbers the comic element in the configuration: in bringing Faust into an ironic relation to these low-comic fops who in our age run after doubt, offer an external argument that they have really doubted — for example, a doctor's certificate — or swear that they have doubted everything, or prove it from the fact that on their travels they met a doubter; these couriers and quick-runners in the world of spirit, who in the greatest haste catch from one person a little whiff of doubt, from another of faith, and now keep house in the best manner, all according as the congregation wants fine sand or coarse sand.)

Faust er for ideal en Figur til at gaae i Slæber.  
Faust is too ideal a figure to go about in slippers.

Den, der ikke har en uendelig Lidenskab, han er ikke ideal, og den, der har en uendelig Lidenskab, han har forlængst frelst sin Sjæl ud af saadant Vaas.  
Whoever does not have an infinite passion, he is not ideal, and whoever does have an infinite passion, he has long since saved his soul out of such nonsense.
> uendelig Lidenskab — infinite passion: «uendelig Lidenskab» (infinite passion) is, throughout «Frygt og Bæven», the mark of the ideal individual and the engine of the «uendelig Bevægelse» (infinite movement) of faith — the opposite of the chatterers' «Vaas» (nonsense, drivel).

Han tier for at offre sig selv — eller han taler med Bevidsthed om, at han vil forvirre Alt.  
He keeps silent in order to sacrifice himself — or he speaks with the consciousness that he will confound everything.

Tier han, da dømmer Ethiken ham; thi den siger: »Du skal anerkjende det Almene, og det anerkjender Du netop ved at tale, og Du tør ikke have Medlidenhed med det Almene."  
If he keeps silent, then ethics judges him; for it says: "You shall acknowledge the universal, and you acknowledge it precisely by speaking, and you dare not have pity on the universal."
> Ethics demands speech: Ethics' verdict, in direct address: «Du skal anerkjende det Almene» (you shall acknowledge the universal) — and one acknowledges it «ved at tale» (by speaking). Silence is, ethically, a refusal. Note the opening guillemet «»…" enclosing ethics' speech, «anerkjende» (acknowledge; period «kj»), and «Medlidenhed» (pity/compassion).

Denne Betragtning skulde man ikke glemme, naar man stundom bedømmer en Tvivler strengt, fordi han taler.  
This consideration one should not forget, when one sometimes judges a doubter harshly because he speaks.

Jeg er ikke tilbøielig til at bedømme en saadan Adfærd mildt; men her som allevegne gjælder det om, at Bevægelserne skee normalt.  
I am not inclined to judge such conduct gently; but here, as everywhere, what matters is that the movements be made in the normal way.
> Subjunctive «skee» (that the movements be made): «at Bevægelserne skee normalt» uses the bare present subjunctive «skee» (modern «ske», to happen/occur) after «det gjælder om, at …» — 'what matters is that the movements be made normally.' The doubled vowel «ee» is period orthography. «Bevægelserne» (the movements) is Kierkegaard's technical term for the inward motions of resignation and faith.

Naar galt skal være, saa er dog en Tvivler, om han end ved at tale bragte al mulig Ulykke over Verden, langt at foretrække for disse elendige Slikmunde, der smage paa Alt, og som ville helbrede Tvivlen uden at kjende den, og som da derfor i Almindelighed ere den nærmere Anledning til, at Tvivleu bryder vildt og ustyrligt frem.  
When the worst must come, a doubter — even if by speaking he brought every possible calamity upon the world — is still far preferable to those wretched sweet-tooths who taste of everything, who would cure doubt without knowing it, and who therefore are generally the more immediate occasion for doubt breaking out wildly and ungovernably.
> OCR slip: «Tvivleu» = «Tvivlen»: «Tvivleu» is a scanning error in the source for «Tvivlen» (the doubt, definite form of «Tvivl»). The whole sentence weighs a «Tvivler» (doubter) against the «Slikmunde» (sweet-tooths) who would cure doubt without knowing it. Preserved verbatim here; a human editor should correct it to «Tvivlen» before publication.

— Taler han, da forvirrer han Alt; thi om det ikke skeer, det faaer han først bag efter at vide, og Udfaldet kan ikke hjælpe Een, hverken i Handlingens Øjeblik eller med Hensyn til Ansvaret.  
— If he speaks, he confounds everything; for if it does not come to pass, that he learns only afterward, and the outcome can help no one, neither in the moment of action nor with respect to responsibility.
> «thi» — for (causal conjunction): «thi» is an archaic/literary 'for, because,' introducing a justification (cf. German «denn»). Kierkegaard uses it constantly in this chunk to chain reasons. The em-dash that opens this sentence is part of the source — it sets off the consequence of speaking.

Tier han paa eget An- og Tilsvar, da kan han vel handle høimodig, men han vil til sin øvrige Smerte føle en lille Anfægtelse; thi det Almene vil bestandig pine ham og sige: Du skulde have talt, hvor vil Du finde Visheden om, at det dog ikke var en krypt Hovmod, der styrede Din Beslutning.  
If he keeps silent on his own account and answer, he may indeed act magnanimously, but to his other pain he will feel a slight spiritual trial; for the universal will perpetually torment him and say: You ought to have spoken — where will you find the certainty that it was not, after all, a hidden pride that governed your decision?
> «det Almene» — the universal: «det Almene» (the universal, the general) is one of the book's pivotal terms: the realm of the ethical, the shared and communicable, into which speech 'translates' a person. The knight of faith stands in tension with it. Note the capital-N nouns (Smerte, Anfægtelse, Vished, Hovmod) typical of period orthography.
> «Anfægtelse» — spiritual trial / temptation: «Anfægtelse» is a religious term of art (German «Anfechtung», Luther's word) for an assault of doubt or temptation on the believing soul. It recurs in this chunk and is deliberately distinguished from ordinary «Fristelse» (temptation).

Kan Tvivleren derimod blive den Enkelte, der som den Enkelte staaer i et absolut Forhold til det Absolute, saa kan han faae en Bemyndigelse for sin Taushed.  
If, on the contrary, the doubter can become the single individual who, as the single individual, stands in an absolute relation to the absolute, then he can obtain an authorization for his silence.
> «den Enkelte» — the single individual: «den Enkelte» (the single individual) names Kierkegaard's central category: the person who, precisely as an individual, stands in an absolute relation to the absolute and thereby above «det Almene». «det Absolute» = the absolute (God). The whole conditional («Kan … saa kan han faae») turns on whether the doubter can attain this standing.

I saa Fald maa han gjøre sin Tvivl til Skyld.  
In that case he must turn his doubt into guilt.

I saa Fald er han i Paradoxet, men i saa Fald er hans Tvivl helbredet, om han end kan faae en anden Tvivl.  
In that case he is in the paradox, but in that case his doubt is cured, even though he may acquire another doubt.
> «Paradoxet» — the paradox: «Paradoxet» (the paradox) is the structural heart of the book: that the single individual is higher than the universal. To 'be in the paradox' is to stand where the ethical is no longer the highest. «om han end …» = 'even though he …' (concessive).

Selv det nye Testament vilde anerkjende en saadan Taushed.  
Even the New Testament would acknowledge such a silence.

Der forekommer endog Steder i det nye Testamente, som anprise Ironi, kun at den bruges til at skjule det Bedre.  
There even occur passages in the New Testament that commend irony, only provided it is used to conceal what is better.
> Period spelling: «skj» in «skjule», «Skjønneste»: «skjule» (to conceal, modern «skjule» — here the «skj» is retained) reflects the period habit of writing «skj/skj» clusters; compare «det Skjønneste» (the most beautiful) and «Skjul» elsewhere. The point of the sentence: irony is praised only when used to hide «det Bedre» (what is better).

Denne Bevægelse er imidlertid ligesaavel Ironiens som enhver anden, der har sin Grund i, at Subjektiviteten er højere end Virkeligheden.  
This movement, however, belongs just as much to irony as to any other that has its ground in the fact that subjectivity is higher than actuality.

Dette vil man i vor Tid ikke vide Noget af, man vil overhovedet ikke vide mere om Ironi end hvad Hegel har sagt, der besynderlig nok ikke forstod sig stort paa den, og bar et Nag til den, hvilket vor Tid har gode Grunde til ikke at opgive; thi den skal blot vogte sig for Ironien.  
Of this our age will know nothing; on the whole it will know no more about irony than what Hegel has said, who oddly enough did not understand much about it and bore a grudge against it — a grudge our age has good reasons not to give up, for it need only beware of irony.

Det hedder i Bjergprædiken: naar Du faster, da salv Dit Hoved og toe Dit Ansigt, at ikke Menneskene skulle see Dig faste.  
It is said in the Sermon on the Mount: when you fast, anoint your head and wash your face, that men may not see you fasting.

Dette Sted vidner ligefrem om, at Subjektiviteten er incommensurabel for Virkeligheden, ja at den har Lov at bedrage.  
This passage testifies plainly that subjectivity is incommensurable with actuality — indeed, that it is permitted to deceive.
> «incommensurabel» — incommensurable: A learned loanword: subjectivity is 'incommensurable' with — has no common measure with — actuality («Virkeligheden»). Kierkegaard keeps the Latinate spelling. The startling claim follows: such subjectivity «har Lov at bedrage» — 'is permitted to deceive.'

Naar blot de Folk, der i vor Tid følte om med løs Tale om Menighedens Idee, vilde læse det nye Testamente, saa kom de maaskee paa andre Tanker.  
If only the people who in our age go about with loose talk of the idea of the congregation would read the New Testament, they might perhaps come to other thoughts.

Men nu Abraham, hvorledes handlede han?  
But now Abraham — how did he act?

thi jeg har ikke glemt, og Læseren vil nu maaskee behage at erindre, at det var for at støde an derpaa, jeg indlod mig i hele den foregaaende Undersøgelse, ikke som Abraham derved blev mere forstaaelig, men at Uforstaaeligheden kunde blive mere desultorisk; thi, som sagt, Abraham kan jeg ikke forstaae, ham kan jeg kun beundre.  
For I have not forgotten, and the reader will now perhaps be pleased to remember, that it was in order to strike against this point that I entered upon the whole preceding inquiry — not so that Abraham might thereby become more intelligible, but so that the unintelligibility might become more desultory; for, as I have said, Abraham I cannot understand, him I can only admire.

Det blev ogsaa bemærket, at intet af de beskrevne Stadier indeholdt en Analogi til Abraham; de bleve kun udviklede, for at de, medens de bleve viste indenfor deres egen Sphære, i Misvisningens Øieblik kunde ligesom antyde det ubekjendte Lands Grændse.  
It was also remarked that none of the stages described contained an analogy to Abraham; they were developed only so that, while they were shown within their own sphere, they might at the moment of divergence in a way intimate the boundary of the unknown land.

Forsaavidt der skulde være Tale om en Analogi, maatte det være Syndens Paradox, men dette ligger igjen i en anden Sphære, og kan ikke forklare Abraham, og er selv langt tettere at forklare end Abraham.  
Insofar as there were to be any talk of an analogy, it would have to be the paradox of sin, but this lies again in another sphere, and cannot explain Abraham, and is itself far easier to explain than Abraham.

Abraham talte altsaa ikke, han talte ikke til Sara, ikke til Elieser, ikke til Isaak, han forbigik de 3 ethiske Instantser; thi det Ethiske havde for Abrabam intet højere Udtryk end Familie-Livet.  
Abraham, then, did not speak; he did not speak to Sarah, not to Eliezer, not to Isaac — he passed over the three ethical authorities; for the ethical had for Abraham no higher expression than family life.
> «det Ethiske» — the ethical: «det Ethiske» (the ethical) is, for Kierkegaard, identical with «det Almene»; its highest concrete form is «Familie-Livet» (family life). Abraham's silence to Sarah, Eliezer, and Isaac bypasses these three 'ethical authorities' («ethiske Instantser»). Note «Abrabam» — an OCR slip for «Abraham», kept verbatim.

Æsthetiken tillod, ja fordrede Taushed af den Enkelte, naar han ved at tie kunde frelse en Anden.  
Aesthetics permitted, indeed demanded, silence of the single individual, when by keeping silent he could save another.

Dette allerede viser tilstrækkelig, at Abraham ikke ligger indenfor Æsthetikens Omfang.  
This alone shows sufficiently that Abraham does not lie within the compass of aesthetics.

Hans Taushed er ingenlunde for at frelse Isaak, som overhovedet hele hans Opgave, at offre Isaak for sin egen og for Guds Skyld, er Æsthetiken en Forargelse; thi den kan vel forstaae,. at jeg offrer mig selv, men ikke at jeg offrer en Anden: for min egen Skyld.  
His silence is by no means in order to save Isaac, just as his whole task as such — to sacrifice Isaac for his own and for God's sake — is to aesthetics an offense; for it can well understand that I sacrifice myself, but not that I sacrifice another for my own sake.

Den æsthetiske Helt var taus…  
The aesthetic hero was silent…
> «Æsthetiken» — aesthetics (the aesthetic sphere): «Æsthetiken» here is not 'art theory' but Kierkegaard's name for the aesthetic life-sphere and its logic. The note «forstaae,.» contains a stray period from the source, preserved verbatim. «Forargelse» (offense, scandal) is a loaded religious word in Kierkegaard.

Ethiken dømte ham imidlertid, fordi han var taus i Kraft. af sin tilfældige Enkelthed.  
Ethics, however, condemned him, because he was silent by virtue of his accidental particularity.

Hans menneskelige Forud-videnhed var det, der bestemte ham til at tie.  
It was his human foreknowledge that determined him to keep silent.

Dettekan Ethiken ikke tilgive, enhver saadan menneskelig: Viden er kun en Illusion, Ethiken fordrer en uendelig Bevægelse, den fordrer Aabenbarelse.  
This ethics cannot forgive; every such human knowing is only an illusion — ethics demands an infinite movement, it demands disclosure.
> OCR slip: «Dettekan» = «Dette kan»: «Dettekan» is a run-together scanning error for «Dette kan» ('This … can'). Kept verbatim. «Aabenbarelse» (disclosure, revelation; doubled-vowel «Aa» = modern «Å») is what ethics demands: the infinite movement that makes the inner outward and communicable.

Den æsthetiskeHelt kan da tale, men vil ikke.  
The aesthetic hero can speak, then, but will not.
> OCR slip: «æsthetiskeHelt» = «æsthetiske Helt»: «æsthetiskeHelt» is a run-together scanning error for «æsthetiske Helt» (aesthetic hero). Kept verbatim. The contrast lands: the aesthetic hero can speak but will not, whereas Abraham (next paragraphs) cannot speak at all.

Den egentlige tragiske Helt offrer sig selv og alt Sit for det Almene; hans Gjerning, enhver Rørelse i ham tilhører det Almene, han er aabenbar, og i denne Aabenbarelse Ethikens elskelige Søn.  
The genuine tragic hero sacrifices himself and all that is his for the universal; his deed, every stirring within him, belongs to the universal — he is manifest, and in this manifestness the beloved son of ethics.

Dette passer ikke paa Abraham, han gjør Intet for det Almene og han er skjult.  
This does not fit Abraham: he does nothing for the universal, and he is concealed.

Nu staae vi da ved Paradoxet.  
Now, then, we stand at the paradox.

Enten kan den Enkelte som den Enkelte staae i et absolut Forhold til det Absolute, og saa er det Ethiske ikke det Høieste, eller Abraham er tabt, han er hverken en tragisk Helt eller en æsthetisk Helt.  
Either the single individual as the single individual can stand in an absolute relation to the absolute — and then the ethical is not the highest — or Abraham is lost: he is neither a tragic hero nor an aesthetic hero.

Forsaavidt kan det atter synes her, at Paradoxet er det Letteste og Nemmeste af Alt.  
Here again it may seem that the paradox is the easiest and most convenient thing of all.

Imidlertid maa jeg gjentage, at den, der holder sig overbeviist derom, han er ikke Troens Ridder, thi Nøden og Angesten er den eneste Berettigelse, der kan tænkes, om den end ikke kan tænkes i Almindelighed; thi saa hæves Paradoxet.  
Yet I must repeat that whoever holds himself convinced of this is not the knight of faith, for distress and anxiety are the only justification conceivable, even though it cannot be conceived in general terms; for then the paradox is annulled.
> «Troens Ridder» — the knight of faith: «Troens Ridder» (the knight of faith) is the book's portrait of true belief, set against the 'knight of infinite resignation.' «Nøden og Angesten» (the distress and the anxiety) are named as the only conceivable justification. «Angest» (modern «angst») is a charged Kierkegaardian word — the subject of his later work The Concept of Anxiety (1844). (Fear and Trembling itself was published 16 October 1843.)

Abraham tier — men han kan ikke tale, deri ligger Nøden og Angesten.  
Abraham keeps silent — but he cannot speak; therein lie the distress and the anxiety.
> «Nøden og Angesten» — distress and anxiety: «Nød» = distress/need/anguish; «Angest» (modern «angst») = anxiety/dread. The pairing recurs as the mark of Abraham's situation: he keeps silent yet cannot speak, and that impossibility is precisely where distress and anxiety lie.

Naar jeg nemlig, idet jeg taler, ikke kan gjøre mig forstaaelig, saa taler jeg ikke, om jeg end talte uafbrudt Nat og Dag.  
For when I, in speaking, cannot make myself intelligible, then I do not speak, even though I were to speak unceasingly night and day.

Dette er Abrahams Tilfælde.  
This is Abraham's case.

Han kan sige Alt; men Eet kan han Frygt og Bæven. 3. Udg. 9 ikke sige, og dog naar han ikke kan sige det 2: sige det saaledes, at en Anden forstaaer det, saa taler han ikke.  
He can say everything; but one thing he cannot say, and yet, since he cannot say it — that is, say it in such a way that another understands it — he does not speak.
> Intruding running header / page number: «Frygt og Bæven. 3. Udg. 9» is a printer's running header (book title, 3rd edition, page 9) that the scan dropped mid-sentence; it is preserved verbatim per source-fidelity rules. Read the sentence without it: «men Eet kan han … ikke sige». «2:» later in the sentence is the period abbreviation mark for «det vil sige» (that is).
> «2:» — the period abbreviation for «that is»: In this 19th-century text «2:» is an abbreviation sign read as «det vil sige» (i.e., 'that is, namely'), introducing a clarification — here, that to 'say' means to say it so another understands. It recurs as «(2: …)» and «3:» later in the chunk.

Det Lindrende i Talen er, at den oversætter mig i det Almene.  
What is relieving in speech is that it translates me into the universal.

Abraham kan nu sige det Skjønneste, noget Sprog kan opdrive, om hvorledes han elsker Isaak.  
Abraham can now say the most beautiful thing any language can muster about how he loves Isaac.

Men dette er ikke det, der ligger ham paa Sinde, det er det Dybere, at han vil offre ham, fordi det er en Prøvelse.  
But this is not what weighs on his mind; it is the deeper matter, that he wills to sacrifice him because it is an ordeal.

Dette Sidste kan Ingen forstaae, og saa kan Enhver kun misforstaae det Første.  
This last thing no one can understand, and so everyone can only misunderstand the first.

Denne Nød kjender den tragiske Helt ikke.  
This distress the tragic hero does not know.

Han har for det første den Trøst, at ethvert Modargument er skeet sin Ret, at han har kunnet give Klytaimnestra, Iphigenia, Achilleus, Chøoret, ethvert levende Væsen, enhver Røst fra Menneskehedens Hjerte, enhver snild, enhver ængstende, enhver anklagende, enhver medlidende Tanke Leilighed til at staae op imod sig.  
He has, in the first place, the consolation that every counter-argument has had its due — that he has been able to give Clytemnestra, Iphigenia, Achilles, the Chorus, every living being, every voice from the heart of humanity, every shrewd, every anxious, every accusing, every compassionate thought, the occasion to rise up against him.

Han kan være sikker paa, at Alt, hvad der lod sig sige mod ham, er blevet sagt, skaanselsløst, ubarmhjertigt — og at stride mod den ganske Verden er en Trøst, at stride med sig selv er forfærdeligt —; han skal ikke frygte for at have overseet Noget, at han engang bagefter maaskee skal raabe som Kong Edvard d. 4. ved Efterretningen om Clarences Mord: Wer bat får ihn? Wer kniet”? in meinem Grimm Zu Fissen mir und bat mich åberlegen? Wer sprach von Bruderpflicht? Wer sprach von Liebe").  
He can be certain that everything which could be said against him has been said, unsparingly, mercilessly — and to contend against the whole world is a consolation, while to contend against oneself is dreadful —; he need not fear that he has overlooked something, that someday afterward he may have to cry out, like King Edward the Fourth at the news of Clarence's murder: Who sued to me for him? Who, in my rage, knelt at my feet and bade me be advised? Who spoke of brotherly duty? Who spoke of love?

Den tragiske Helt kjender ikke Eensomhedens forfærdelige Ansvar.  
The tragic hero does not know the dreadful responsibility of solitude.

Dernæst har han den Trøst, at han kan græde og klage med Klytaimnestra og Iphigenia — og Taarer og Skrig lindre, men uudsigelige Sukke martre.  
Next, he has the consolation that he can weep and lament together with Clytemnestra and Iphigenia — and tears and cries bring relief, but unutterable sighs are torment.

Agamemnon kan hurtig samle sin Sjæl i Vished om, at han vil handle, og da har han endnu Tid at trøste og opmuntre.  
Agamemnon can quickly gather his soul into the certainty that he will act, and then he still has time to console and to encourage.

Dette kan Abraham ikke.  
This Abraham cannot do.

Naar hans Hjerte ”) Cfr. 2. Akt 1. Scene. er bevæget, naar hans Ord vilde indeholde en salig Trøst for den ganske Verden, da tør han ikke trøste, thi skulde ikke Sara, skulde ikke Elieser, skulde ikke Isaak sige til ham: ,hvorfor vil Du da gjøre det, Du kan jo lade være.”  
When his heart is moved, when his words would contain a blessed consolation for the whole world, he dare not console; for would not Sarah, would not Eliezer, would not Isaac say to him: "Why will you do it, then — you can after all refrain."
> Intruding footnote (stage reference): «”) Cfr. 2. Akt 1. Scene.» is a footnote marker and reference (Cfr. = confer, 'compare'; Act 2, Scene 1) that the scan folded into the running text; kept verbatim. Read the sentence without it: «Naar hans Hjerte er bevæget …». «,hvorfor …»' uses the low opening comma-quote of the period for direct speech.

Og dersom han da i sin Nød vilde give sig Luft, vilde omfavne Alt, hvad der var ham kjært, inden han skred til det Sidste, da skulde han maaskee afstedkomme det Forfærdelige, at Sara, al Elieser, at Isaak forargedes paa ham og troede, han var en Hykler.  
And if, in his distress, he were then to give vent to himself, were to embrace all that was dear to him before he proceeded to the last act, he might perhaps bring about the dreadful thing — that Sarah, that Eliezer, that Isaac would take offense at him and believe him a hypocrite.

Tale kan han ikke, han taler intet menneskeligt Sprog.  
Speak he cannot; he speaks no human language.

Om han selv forstod alle Jordens Tungemaal, om de Elskede ogsaa forstode dem, han kan dog ikke tale — han taler i et guddommeligt Tungemaal, han taler i Tunger.  
Though he himself understood all the tongues of the earth, though the beloved ones also understood them, he still cannot speak — he speaks in a divine tongue, he speaks in tongues.

Denne Nød kan jeg vel forstaae, jeg kan beundre Abraham, jeg frygter ikke for, at Nogen ved denne Fortælling skulde fristes til letsindigen at ville være den Enkelte, men jeg tilstaaer ogsaa, at jeg ikke har Mod dertil, og at jeg med Glæde renoncerer paa enhver Udsigt til at komme videre, dersom det blot var muligt, at jeg nogensinde, om end nok saa silde, kom saavidt.  
This distress I can indeed understand; I can admire Abraham; I do not fear that anyone, on the strength of this tale, would be tempted frivolously to want to be the single individual — but I also confess that I do not have the courage for it, and that I gladly renounce every prospect of getting further, if only it were possible that I might someday, however late, get that far.

I ethvert Øieblik kan Abraham bryde af, han kan angre det Hele som en Anfægtelse, da kan han tale, da kunne alle forstaae ham — men da er han ikke Abraham mere.  
At any moment Abraham can break off; he can repent of the whole thing as a spiritual trial — then he can speak, then all can understand him — but then he is Abraham no longer.

Abraham kan ikke tale; thi det Alt Forklarende kan han ikke sige, (2: saa det er forstaaeligt), at det er en Prøvelse, vel at mærke, en saadan, hvor det Ethiske er Fristelsen.  
Abraham cannot speak; for he cannot say the all-explaining word — say it, that is, so that it is intelligible — that it is an ordeal, mark well, an ordeal of such a kind that the ethical is the temptation.

Den, der er stillet saaledes, han er en Emigrant fra det Almenes Sphære.  
He who is placed thus is an emigrant from the sphere of the universal.

Men det Næste kan han endnu mindre sige.  
But the next thing he can say even less.

Abraham gjør nemlig, som tidligere tilstrækkelig udviklet, to Bevægelser.  
For Abraham makes, as has been sufficiently developed earlier, two movements.

Han gjør Resignationens uendelige Bevægelse, og opgiver Isaak, dette kan Ingen forstaae, fordi det er et privat Foretagende; men dernæst gjør han i ethvert Moment Troens Bevægelse.  
He makes the infinite movement of resignation and gives up Isaac — this no one can understand, because it is a private undertaking; but then, at every moment, he makes the movement of faith.
> «Resignationens uendelige Bevægelse» — the infinite movement of resignation: The 'infinite movement of resignation' is the first of Abraham's two movements: he gives up Isaac absolutely. The second, made 'at every moment,' is «Troens Bevægelse» — the movement of faith, by which he gets Isaac back «i Kraft af det Absurde» (by virtue of the absurd). Both phrases recur as the book's technical vocabulary.

Delte er hans Trøst.  
This is his consolation.

Han siger nemlig: dog vil det ikke skee, eller hvis det skeer, da vil Herren give mig en ny Isaak i Kraft nemlig af det Absurde.  
For he says: yet it will not come to pass, or if it does come to pass, then the Lord will give me a new Isaac, by virtue, namely, of the absurd.
> OCR slip: «Delte» = «Dette»: «Delte er hans Trøst» is a scanning error for «Dette er hans Trøst» — 'This is his consolation.' Kept verbatim. The 'this' refers to the movement of faith just described.

Den tragiske Helt han faaer dog Ende paa Historien.  
The tragic hero, after all, does reach the end of his story.
> «i Kraft af det Absurde» — by virtue of the absurd: «i Kraft af det Absurde» (by virtue of the absurd) is the book's signature phrase for faith's logic: Abraham believes he will keep Isaac even as he resigns him — not on human calculation, but against it. «dog» (yet) and «nemlig» (namely) are the discourse particles carrying the argument.

Iphigenia bøjer sig under Faderens Beslutning, hun gjør selv Resignationens uendelige Bevægelse og de ére nu i Forstaaelse med hinanden.  
Iphigenia bows under her father's resolve; she herself makes the infinite movement of resignation, and they are now in understanding with each other.

Hun kan forstaae Agamemnon, fordi hans Foretagende udtrykker det Almene.  
She can understand Agamemnon, because his undertaking expresses the universal.

Vilde Agamemnon derimod sige til hende: ,uagtet Guden fordrer Dig som Offer, saa var det dog muligt, at han ikke fordrede det, i Kraft nemlig af det Absurde,” saa vilde han i samme Øieblik blive uforstaaelig for Iphigenia.  
If, on the contrary, Agamemnon were to say to her, "although the god demands you as a sacrifice, it is nonetheless possible that he did not demand it, by virtue, namely, of the absurd," he would at that very moment become unintelligible to Iphigenia.

Kunde kan sige det i Kraft af menneskelig Beregning, såa skulde Iphigenia vel forstaae ham; men saa vilde deraf følge, at Agamemnon ikke havde gjort Resignationens uendelige Bevægelse, og saa er han ikke Helt, saa er Spaamandens Udsagn en Skipperefterretning, og den hele Begivenhed en Vaudeville.  
Could he say it by virtue of human calculation, Iphigenia would presumably understand him; but then it would follow that Agamemnon had not made the infinite movement of resignation, and so he is no hero — then the soothsayer's pronouncement is a skipper's report, and the whole affair a vaudeville.
> The absurd makes one unintelligible: The hypothetical Agamemnon speech contrasts with Abraham: were Agamemnon to invoke «det Absurde», he would become «uforstaaelig» (unintelligible) to Iphigenia. «uagtet» = although/notwithstanding. The low opening comma-quotes «,uagtet …»' are period punctuation for direct speech, preserved verbatim.

Abraham talede da ikke.  
Abraham, then, did not speak.
> OCR slip: «Kunde kan sige» = «Kunde han sige»: «Kunde kan sige det» is a scanning error for «Kunde han sige det» — 'Could he say it.' Likewise «såa» (with å) appears for «saa» (so). Both kept verbatim. «Skipperefterretning» (a skipper's report — i.e. an unreliable rumor) and «Vaudeville» land the deflating point: without resignation, the tragic hero's story is mere farce.

Kun eet Ord er der ophevaret af ham, den eneste Replik til Isaak, hvilken da ogsaa tilstrækkelig beviser, at han ikke havde talet iforveien.  
Only one word of his has been preserved, the single reply to Isaac, which therefore also proves sufficiently that he had not spoken beforehand.

Isaak gjør Abraham det Spørgsmaal. hvor Lammet er til Brændoffer.  
Isaac puts the question to Abraham, where the lamb for the burnt offering is.

,0g Abraham sagde: Gud skal see sig om Lammet til Brændofferet min Søn!"  
"And Abraham said: God will provide himself the lamb for the burnt offering, my son!"

Dette sidste Ord af Abraham skal jeg her lidt nærmere betragte.  
This last word of Abraham I shall here consider a little more closely.

Dersom dette Ord ikke var, da vilde den hele Begivenhed mangle Noget, dersom det var anderledes, da vilde Alt maaskee opløse sig i Forvirring.  
If this word were not, the whole event would lack something; if it were otherwise, everything would perhaps dissolve into confusion.

Det har ofte været Gjenstand for min Overveielse, hvorvidt en tragisk Helt, hvad enten han culminerer i. en Liden eller en Handling, bør have en sidste Replik.  
It has often been the object of my reflection whether a tragic hero, whether he culminates in a suffering or in an action, ought to have a last reply.

Det heroer, efter hvad jeg kan skjønne, paa, hvilken LivsSphære han tilhører, hvorvidt hans Liv har intellectuel Betydning, hvorvidt hans Liden eller Handling staae i Forhold til Aand.  
It depends, as far as I can judge, on which life-sphere he belongs to, on whether his life has intellectual significance, on whether his suffering or his action stands in relation to spirit.
> «LivsSphære» — life-sphere: «LivsSphære» (life-sphere) and the related «LivsBetydning» (life's significance) name Kierkegaard's stages of existence. The run-together capitalization («LivsSphære», «LivsBetydning») is the source's; whether a hero's life stands «i Forhold til Aand» (in relation to spirit) decides whether a last reply suits him.

Det følger af sig selv, at den tragiske Helt i sit Culminations Øieblik, ligesom ethvert andet Menneske, der ikke er Mælet berøvet, kan sige et Par Ord, maaskee et Par passende Ord, men Spørgsmaalet er, hvorvidt det er passende for ham at sige dem.  
It goes without saying that the tragic hero, in his moment of culmination, like every other person who is not deprived of speech, can say a few words, perhaps a few fitting words — but the question is whether it is fitting for him to say them.

Ligger hans LivsBetydning i en udvortes Gjerning, da har han Intet at sige, da er Alt, hvad han siger, væsentlig Passiar, hvorved han kun svækker Indtrykket af sig selv, hvorimod det tragiske Ceremoniel byder, at han taus fuldkommer sin Opgave, hvad enten denne bestaaer i en Handling eller i en Liden.  
If his life's significance lies in an outward deed, then he has nothing to say; then everything he says is essentially idle chatter, by which he only weakens the impression of himself, whereas the tragic ceremonial demands that he silently complete his task, whether it consists in an action or in a suffering.

For ikke at gaae for vidt, vil jeg blot tage hvad der ligger allernærmest.  
In order not to go too far, I will simply take what lies nearest at hand.

Hvis Agamemnon selv, ikke Kalchas, skulde have draget Kniven mod Iphigenia, da havde han blot nedværdiget sig selv, ved i det sidste Øieblik, at ville sige et Par Ord; thi hans Gjernings Betydning var jo vitterlig for Alle, Pietetens, Medlidenhedens, Følelsens, Taarernes Procedure var fuldendt, og for øvrigt havde hans Liv intet Forhold til Aand 3: han var ikke Lærer eller Aandens Vidne.  
If Agamemnon himself, not Calchas, were to have drawn the knife against Iphigenia, then he would only have degraded himself by wanting, at the last moment, to say a few words; for the significance of his deed was, after all, evident to all, the procedure of piety, of compassion, of feeling, of tears was completed — and besides, his life had no relation to spirit, that is, he was not a teacher or a witness of the spirit.
> Stray period in «culminerer i. en Liden»: «en Liden» here is the substantive 'a suffering/passion' (a passive undergoing, opposed to «en Handling», an action) — not the adjective 'little.' The period in «i. en Liden» is a source artifact, kept verbatim; read «culminerer i en Liden» — 'culminates in a suffering.'

Er en Helts Livs Betydning derimod i Retning af Aand, da vilde Manglen paa Replik svække Indtrykket af ham.  
If, on the contrary, a hero's life's significance lies in the direction of spirit, then the lack of a reply would weaken the impression of him.

Det, han da har at sige, er ikke et Par passende Ord, et lille Declamations-Stykke, men Betydningen af hans Replik er, at han gjennemfører sig selv i det afgjørende Øieblik.  
What he then has to say is not a few fitting words, a little declamation-piece, but the significance of his reply is that he carries himself through in the decisive moment.

En saadan intellectuel tragisk Helt, han bør have og han bør beholde det sidste Ord.  
Such an intellectual tragic hero — he ought to have and he ought to keep the last word.

Man fordrer af ham den samme forklarede Holdning, som den, der anstaaer enhver tragisk Helt, men da fordrer man endnu eet Ord.  
One demands of him the same transfigured bearing that becomes any tragic hero, but then one demands one word more.

Forsaavidt da en saadan intellectuel tragisk Helt culminerer i en Liden (i Døden), da bliver han i dette sidste Ord udødelig før han døer, medens derimod den almindelige tragiske Helt først bliver udødelig efter sin Død.  
Insofar, then, as such an intellectual tragic hero culminates in a suffering (in death), he becomes immortal in this last word before he dies, whereas the ordinary tragic hero becomes immortal only after his death.

Socrates kan man bruge som et Exempel.  
Socrates may be used as an example.
> «Aand» — spirit: «Aand» (spirit, modern «Ånd»; doubled-vowel «Aa» = «Å») is the decisive category here: a hero whose life relates to spirit — a teacher or «Aandens Vidne» (witness of the spirit) — must keep the last word. «3:» is again the period abbreviation mark for «det vil sige» (that is).

Han var en intellectuel tragisk Helt.  
He was an intellectual tragic hero.

Hans Dødsdom bliver ham forkyndt.  
His death sentence is announced to him.

I det Øieblik døer han, thi den, som ikke forstaaer, at der fordres Aandens hele Kraft til at døe, og at Helten altid døer, før han døer, han skal ikke komme synderligt vidt i sin Betragtning af Livet.  
In that moment he dies; for whoever does not understand that the whole power of the spirit is required in order to die, and that the hero always dies before he dies, will not get particularly far in his contemplation of life.

Som Helt fordres der nu af Socrates, at han rolig hviler i sig selv, men som intellectuel tragisk Helt fordres der af ham, at han i dette sidste Øjeblik har Aandsstyrke nok til at gjennemføre sig selv.  
As a hero it is now required of Socrates that he rest calmly within himself, but as an intellectual tragic hero it is required of him that in this last moment he have strength of spirit enough to carry himself through.

Han kan da ikke som den almindelige tragiske Helt concentrere sig paa at holde sig ligeoverfor Døden, men han maa saa hurtig gjøre denne Bevægelse, at han i samme Øieblik med sin Bevidsthed er ude over denne Strid og hævder sig selv.  
He cannot, then, like the ordinary tragic hero, concentrate on holding himself steady in the face of death, but he must make this movement so quickly that in the very same moment he is, with his consciousness, beyond this struggle and asserts himself.

Dersom saaledes Socrates i Dødens Krisis havde forstummet, da havde han svækket Virkningen af sit Liv, vakt en Mistanke om, at Ironiens Elasticitet i ham ikke var en Verdenskraft, men et Spil, hvis Spænstighed i det afgjørende Øieblik maatte bruges efter omvendt Maalestok til pathetisk at holde ham oppe”).  
If, in this way, Socrates had fallen silent at the crisis of his death, he would have weakened the effect of his life, awakened a suspicion that the elasticity of irony in him was not a world-force but a game whose springiness in the decisive moment had to be used, by an inverted measure, to hold him pathetically upright”).
> Ironiens Elasticitet — the elasticity of irony: «Ironiens Elasticitet» (the elasticity of irony) and «Spænstighed» (springiness) extend a single image: irony as a resilient force. Note the period orthography — «afgjørende» (modern «afgørende», decisive), «Øieblik» (modern «øjeblik», moment), and «maatte» with doubled vowel (modern «måtte», had to). The trailing «oppe”).» is the OCR-spliced close of an embedded footnote; keep it verbatim.

Hvad her kortelig er antydet, kan vel ikke finde sin Anvendelse paa Abraham, forsaavidt man mener ved nogen Analogi at skulle kunne udfinde et passende Ord for Abraham til at ende med, men vel forsaavidt, at man indseer Nødvendigheden af, at Abraham i det sidste Øieblik maa gjennemføre sig selv, ikke taus maa drage Kniven, men have et Ord at sige, da han som Troens Fader har absolut Betydning i Retning af Aand.  
What has here been briefly hinted at can hardly find its application to Abraham — not insofar as one supposes that by some analogy one could find a fitting word for Abraham to end with, but rather insofar as one sees the necessity that in the last moment Abraham must carry himself through, must not silently draw the knife but have a word to say, since he, as the father of faith, has absolute significance in the direction of spirit.
> Troens Fader — the father of faith: «Troens Fader» (the father of faith) is Kierkegaard's recurring title for Abraham. «forsaavidt» (modern «forsåvidt»/«for så vidt», insofar as) frames the careful concessive structure, and «gjennemføre» shows the period «gj» spelling (modern «gennemføre», carry through). «Aand» (modern «ånd», spirit) keeps the doubled «aa».

Hvad han skal sige, derom kan jeg ingen Forestilling gjøre mig iforveien; efterat han hår sagt det, kan jeg vel forstaae, vel i en vis Forstand forstaae Abraham i det ") Hvilken Replik af Socrates der maa ansees for den afgjørende, derom kunne Meningerne være delte, da Socrates paa saa mange Maader ved Plato er poetisk forflygtiget.  
What he is to say, of that I can form no conception beforehand; after he has said it, I can well understand, can in a certain sense understand Abraham in the ") Which remark of Socrates is to be regarded as the decisive one — about that opinions may be divided, since Socrates has in so many ways been poetically volatilized by Plato.
> Replik — line, rejoinder: «Replik» means a spoken line or rejoinder (here, a famous saying of Socrates). The «")» is an OCR-spliced footnote-opener that has fallen into the running text; in the original it marks the start of a footnote. «hår» is an OCR slip for «har» (has).

Jeg foreslaaer følgende: Dødsdommen bliver ham forkyndt, i samme Øieblik døer han, i samme Øieblik overvinder han Døden og gjennemfører sig selv i det berømte Tilsvar: at det forundrede ham, at han var bleven dømt med en Majoritet af 3 Stemmer.  
I propose the following: the death sentence is pronounced to him, in the same moment he dies, in the same moment he overcomes death and carries himself through in the famous retort — that it surprised him that he had been condemned by a majority of three votes.
> Tilsvar — retort, reply: «Tilsvar» = a retort or answering reply. «Dødsdommen» (the death sentence) and «forkyndt» (proclaimed, announced) belong to the legal register Kierkegaard sustains here. Note «døer» (modern «dør», dies) with the period «øe» spelling.

Ingen løs og ledig Tale paa Torvet, ingen taabelig Bemærkning af en Idiot kunde han have spøget mere ironisk med, end med den Dødsdom, der dømmer ham selv fra Livet.  
No loose and idle talk in the marketplace, no foolish remark by an idiot could he have toyed with more ironically than with the death sentence that condemns him himself to death.
> Dødsdom — death sentence: «Dødsdom» (death sentence) closes the legal image: the very verdict that condemns Socrates becomes his last object of irony. «taabelig» (modern «tåbelig», foolish) and «spøget» (jested, toyed) keep the period spellings.

val dne ” bb S em Sagte, uden dog derved at være kommen ham nærmere, end jeg har været ham i det Foregaaende.  
val dne ” bb S em said, without thereby having come any nearer to him than I have been to him in what preceded.

Dersom der ingen sidste Replik havde existeret af Socrates, da havde jeg kunnet tænke mig ind i ham og dannet en saadan, havde jeg ikke kunnet gjøre det, saa havde en Digter formaaet det, men Abraham naaer ingen Digter.  
If no last remark of Socrates had existed, then I would have been able to think myself into him and have fashioned one; had I not been able to do that, then a poet would have managed it — but Abraham no poet reaches.
> Digter — poet: «Digter» (poet) marks Kierkegaard's contrast: a poet could imagine words for Socrates, but «Abraham naaer ingen Digter» — no poet reaches Abraham, because faith lies beyond the aesthetic. Note «existeret» (period spelling, modern «eksisteret») and «gjøre» (modern «gøre»).

Inden jeg gaaer over til nærmere at betragte Åbrahams sidste Ord, maa jeg først gjøre opmærksom paa Vanskeligheden af, at Abraham overhovedet kan komme til at sige Noget.  
Before I go on to consider Abraham's last words more closely, I must first call attention to the difficulty that Abraham can come to say anything at all.

Nøden og Angesten i Paradoxet laae, som ovenfor udviklet, netop i Tausheden, Abraham kan ikke tale”).  
The distress and the anxiety in the paradox lay, as developed above, precisely in the silence — Abraham cannot speak”).
> Angest — anxiety; Paradoxet — the paradox: «Angest» (anxiety/dread) is a central Kierkegaardian term (the title of his 1844 «Begrebet Angest», The Concept of Anxiety). Here «Nøden og Angesten i Paradoxet» (the distress and anxiety in the paradox) lie «i Tausheden» (in the silence). «laae» is the period spelling of «lå» (lay), with doubled vowel. The closing «tale”).» is again an OCR-spliced footnote end.

Forsaavidt er det da en Selvmodsigelse at fordre, at han skal tale, med mindre man vil have ham ud igjen af Paradoxet, saaledes, at han i del afgjørende Øieblik suspenderer det, hvorved han da ophører at være Abraham og annullerer hele det Foregaaende… Dersom saaledes Abraham nu i det afgjørende Øieblik vilde sige til Isaak: det er Dig, det gjælder, da var dette kun en Svaghed.  
To that extent it is, then, a self-contradiction to demand that he shall speak, unless one wishes to have him out of the paradox again, in such a way that in the decisive moment he suspends it, whereby he then ceases to be Abraham and annuls all that preceded… If, in this way, Abraham now in the decisive moment would say to Isaac: it is you it concerns — then this would only be a weakness.
> Paradoxet — the paradox: «Paradoxet» (the paradox) is the book's governing idea: the single individual, by faith, in an absolute relation to the absolute. To make Abraham «suspendere» it would «annullere» everything prior. «det afgjørende Øieblik» (the decisive moment) recurs as a refrain; «Foregaaende…» (what preceded) ends with the period ellipsis kept verbatim.

Thi kunde han overhovedet tale, da maatte han have talt for længe siden, og Svagheden vilde da ligge i, at han ikke havde havt Aands Modenhed og Concentration til forud at tænke hele Smerten, men skubbet Noget af sig, saaledes at den virkelige Smerte var et Mere end den tænkte.  
For if he could speak at all, he would have had to speak long ago, and the weakness would then lie in this, that he had not had the spirit's maturity and concentration to think the whole pain through beforehand, but had pushed something away from himself, so that the actual pain was a More than the one thought.
> Aands Modenhed — the spirit's maturity: «Aands Modenhed og Concentration» (the spirit's maturity and concentration) is what would let one «forud at tænke hele Smerten» — think the whole pain through in advance. «et Mere» (a More) is Kierkegaard's substantivized comparative: the real pain exceeds the imagined. «Concentration» keeps the Latinate «c»-spelling of the period.

Desuden , vilde han ved en saadan Tale falde ud af Paradoxet, og hvis han virkelig vilde tale med Isaak, maatte han forvandle sin Tilstand til en Anfægtelse; thi ellers kunde han dog Intet sige, og gjør han dette, da er han end ikke nogen tragisk Helt.  
Besides, by such speech he would fall out of the paradox, and if he really wished to speak with Isaac, he would have to transform his condition into a temptation; for otherwise he could say nothing at all, and if he does this, then he is not even a tragic hero.
> Anfægtelse — spiritual trial, temptation: «Anfægtelse» is a theologically loaded term — a spiritual trial or assault on faith (German «Anfechtung»), distinct from ordinary «Fristelse» (temptation). Kierkegaard's point: to speak would turn Abraham's faith-act into a mere trial, demoting him below even «en tragisk Helt» (a tragic hero).

Imidlertid er der dog opbevaret et sidste Ord af Abraham, og forsaavidt jeg kan forstaae Paradoxet, kan ") Forsaavidt der kan være Tale om nogen Analogi, afgiver Pythagoras's Døds-Situation en saadan, thi den af ham altid hævdede Taushed maatte han gjennemføre i sit sidste Øieblik, og derfor sagde han: det er bedre at dræbes end at tale. Cfr.  
Meanwhile a last word of Abraham has nonetheless been preserved, and insofar as I can understand the paradox, I can ") Insofar as there can be talk of any analogy, the death-situation of Pythagoras affords such a one, for the silence he had always upheld he had to carry through in his last moment, and therefore he said: it is better to be killed than to speak. Cfr.

Diogenes 8de Bog $ 39.  
Diogenes, eighth book, § 39.

jeg ogsaa forstaae Abrahams totale Tilstedeværelse i dette Ord.  
also understand Abraham's total presence in this word.

Han siger først og fremmest ikke Noget, og å denne Form siger han hvad han har at sige.  
He says first and foremost nothing, and in this form he says what he has to say.

Hans Svar til Isaak har Ironiens Form, thi det er altid Ironi, naar jeg siger Noget, og dog ikke siger Noget.  
His answer to Isaac has the form of irony, for it is always irony when I say something and yet say nothing.
> Ironi — irony: «Ironi» (irony), the subject of Kierkegaard's dissertation «Om Begrebet Ironi» (On the Concept of Irony, 1841), is defined here in miniature: «at sige Noget, og dog ikke sige Noget» (to say something and yet say nothing). Abraham's reply has this form.

Isaak spørger Abraham i den Formening, at Abraham er vidende.  
Isaac questions Abraham in the supposition that Abraham is knowing.

Vilde Abraham nu have svaret: jeg veed Intet, saa havde han sagt en Usandhed.  
Had Abraham now answered: I know nothing — then he would have said an untruth.

Sige Noget kan han ikke; thi hvad han veed, kan han ikke sige.  
Say something he cannot; for what he knows, he cannot say.

Han svarer da: Gud skal see sig om Lammet til Brændoffer min Søn!  
He answers then: God will provide himself the lamb for the burnt offering, my son!

Man seer heraf Dobbeltbevægelsen i Abrahams Sjæl, saaledes som den er beskreven i det Foregaaende.  
One sees from this the double movement in Abraham's soul, just as it has been described in what preceded.
> Dobbeltbevægelsen — the double movement: «Dobbeltbevægelsen» (the double movement) is Kierkegaard's core formula for faith: infinite resignation and then, by virtue of the absurd, receiving the finite back. Abraham makes both movements at once, which is why his word is no untruth.

Havde Abraham blot resigneret paa Isaak og ikke gjort mere, saa har han sagt en Usandhed; thi han veed jo, at Gud fordrer Isaak til Offer, og han veed, at han selv netop i dette Øieblik er redebvn til at offre ham.  
Had Abraham merely resigned Isaac and done no more, then he has said an untruth; for he indeed knows that God demands Isaac as a sacrifice, and he knows that he himself, precisely in this moment, is ready to sacrifice him.

Han har da i ethvert Øieblik, efter at have gjort denne Bevægelse, gjort den næste, gjort Troens Bevægelse i Kraft af det Absurde.  
He has then, in every moment, after having made this movement, made the next, made the movement of faith by virtue of the absurd.
> i Kraft af det Absurde — by virtue of the absurd: «i Kraft af det Absurde» (by virtue of the absurd) is the signature phrase of «Frygt og Bæven»: faith believes, against all reason, that the finite (Isaac) will be restored. «redebvn» (segment 23) is an OCR slip for «rede(t)/beredt» — 'ready'. «Troens Bevægelse» = the movement of faith.

Forsaavidt siger han ingen Usandhed; thi i Kraft af det Absurde er det jo muligt, at Gud kunde gjøre noget ganske Andet.  
To that extent he speaks no untruth; for by virtue of the absurd it is indeed possible that God could do something quite other.

Han siger da ingen Usandhed, men han siger da heller ikke Noget; thi han taler i et fremmed Tungemaal.  
He speaks, then, no untruth, but neither does he say anything; for he speaks in a foreign tongue.

Dette bliver endnu evidentere, naar vi betænke, at det var Abraham selv, der skulde offre Isaak.  
This becomes still more evident when we consider that it was Abraham himself who was to sacrifice Isaac.

Havde Opgaven været en anden, havde Herren befalet Abraham at bringe Isaak ud paa Morija-Bjerget, saa skulde han selv lade sit Lyn ramme Isaak og saaledes tage ham som et Offer, saa kunde Abraham i ligefrem Forstand have Ret i at tale saa ænigmatisk, som han gjør; thi saa kunde han jo ikke selv vide hvad der vilde skee.  
Had the task been a different one, had the Lord commanded Abraham to bring Isaac out upon Mount Moriah so that he himself should let his lightning strike Isaac and thus take him as a sacrifice, then Abraham could in a straightforward sense be right in speaking as enigmatically as he does; for then he could not himself know what would happen.

Men saaledes som Opgaven er stillet Abraham, skal han jo selv handle, han maa altsaa i det afgjørende Øieblik vide, hvad han selv vil gjøre, og altsaa maa han vide, at Isaak skal offres.  
But as the task is set for Abraham, he himself is to act; he must therefore in the decisive moment know what he himself will do, and thus he must know that Isaac is to be sacrificed.

Har han ikke vidst dette med Bestemthed, saa har han ikke gjort Resignationens uendelige Bevægelse, saa er hans Ord vel ikke Usandhed, men han er tillige meget langt fra at være Abraham, han er ubetydeligere end en tragisk Helt, ja han er en uresolveret Mand, der hverken kan beslutte sig til det Ene eller til det Andet, og som paa Grund deraf altid vil komme til at tale i Gaader.  
Has he not known this with certainty, then he has not made the infinite movement of resignation, and then his word is indeed not an untruth, but he is at the same time very far from being Abraham; he is more insignificant than a tragic hero, indeed he is an irresolute man who can decide neither for the one thing nor for the other, and who on that account will always come to speak in riddles.
> Resignation — infinite resignation: «Resignationens uendelige Bevægelse» (the infinite movement of resignation) is the first of the double movement: giving Isaac up wholly. Without it, Abraham would be merely «en uresolveret Mand» (an irresolute man), below «en tragisk Helt». Note «beslutte sig» (to resolve/decide) and «Gaader» (riddles, modern «gåder»).

Men en saadan Hæsitator er lige Parodien paa Troens Ridder.  
But such a Hesitator is precisely the parody of the knight of faith.
> Troens Ridder — the knight of faith: «Troens Ridder» (the knight of faith) is the book's emblematic figure, set against «den tragiske Helt» (the tragic hero) and the resigning knight. A «Hæsitator» (hesitator, one who wavers) is the mere «Parodi» (parody) of him.

Det viser sig da atter her, at man vel kan forstaae Abraham, men kun forstaae ham saaledes, som man forstaaer Paradoxet.  
It shows itself here again that one can indeed understand Abraham, but understand him only in the way one understands the paradox.
> forstaae — to understand (period spelling): «forstaae» / «forstaaer» keep the doubled-vowel period spelling of «forstå» (to understand). The thought is recursive: one can understand Abraham only in the way one understands «Paradoxet» — i.e. as that which cannot be understood within the ethical/universal.

Jeg for mit Vedkommende kan vel forstaae Abraham, men fatter tillige, at jeg ikke har Mod til at tale saaledes, ligesaa lidet som jeg har Mod til at handle som Abraham; men derfor siger jeg ingenlunde, at det er noget Ringe, da det tværtimod er det eneste Vidunderlige.  
For my own part I can indeed understand Abraham, but I grasp at the same time that I have not the courage to speak in that way, just as little as I have the courage to act as Abraham did; but by that I by no means say that it is something paltry, since on the contrary it is the one and only marvel.
> det Vidunderlige — the marvel: «det eneste Vidunderlige» (the one and only marvel/wonder). Johannes de silentio repeatedly confesses he lacks the «Mod» (courage) to act as Abraham — yet insists this is «ingenlunde… noget Ringe» (by no means anything paltry). «ligesaa lidet» = just as little; «ingenlunde» = by no means.

Og hvad dømte nu Samtiden om den tragiske Helt?  
And what did the contemporary age now judge of the tragic hero?

at han var stor, og den beundrede ham.  
that he was great, and it admired him.

Og hiin hæderværdige Samling af Ædle, den Jury, som enhver Slægt constituerer til at dømme den forbigangne Slægt, den dømte ligesaa.  
And that honorable assembly of the noble, the jury which every generation constitutes to judge the generation gone before, it judged likewise.
> Slægt — generation: «Slægt» means generation (also lineage, kin). The image of «den Jury, som enhver Slægt constituerer til at dømme den forbigangne Slægt» (the jury every generation constitutes to judge the one gone before) sets up the contrast: the tragic hero is judged and admired; Abraham, none could understand. «Ædle» = the noble (ones).

Men Abraham var der Ingen, der kunde forstaae.  
But Abraham there was no one who could understand.

Og dog hvad opnaaede han?  
And yet what did he attain?

At han blev sin Kjærlighed tro.  
That he remained true to his love.

Men den, der elsker Gud, han behøver ikke Taarer, ikke Beundring, han glemmer Lidelsen 1 Kjærligheden, ja saa aldeles har han glemt den, at der skulde end ikke bag efter være den mindste Anelse om hans Smerte, hvis Gud selv ikke mindedes den; thi han seer i Løndom, og kjender Nøden og tæller Taarerne og glemmer Intet.  
But he who loves God has need of no tears, no admiration; he forgets the suffering in the love — indeed so wholly has he forgotten it that there should not afterward be even the least intimation of his pain, if God himself did not remember it; for he sees in secret, and knows the distress, and counts the tears, and forgets nothing.
> i Løndom — in secret: «i Løndom» (in secret/hiddenness) echoes Matthew 6 — God «som seer i Løndom» (who sees in secret) and forgets nothing. «behøver» = needs; «Taarer» (tears) and «seer» (sees) keep the doubled-vowel period spellings. «Lidelsen 1 Kjærligheden» has an OCR «1» for «i» (in).

Enten er der da et Paradox til, at den Enkelte som den Enkelte staaer i et absolut Forhold til det Absolute, eller Abraham er tabt.  
Either there is, then, a paradox — that the single individual as the single individual stands in an absolute relation to the absolute — or Abraham is lost.
> den Enkelte — the single individual: The closing dilemma states the book's thesis bare: «enten» (either) there is a paradox by which «den Enkelte» (the single individual) as such «staaer i et absolut Forhold til det Absolute» (stands in an absolute relation to the absolute), «eller» (or) «Abraham er tabt» (Abraham is lost). This «den Enkelte» / «det Absolute» relation is the heart of «Frygt og Bæven».
---

Source text: public domain (Søren Kierkegaard, d. 1855; first published 1843, under the pseudonym Johannes de silentio). English translation: © 2026 1732 Studios, LLC — original draft, pending editorial review. NOTE: minimal seed excerpt; the 1843 Danish should be verified against Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter (SKS) before shipping, and full content is authored through the content pipeline.