Main sun rahaa hun har ik simt se Ghazal, logo......

[Anil Kala]

Dushyant Kumar (1933-1975) died young. Mostly wrote in Hindi but few ghazals also....


ye roushani hai haqiiqat meN CHal (deception), logo
ki jaise jal meN jhalakta hai mahal, logo

daraKht haiN to pariNde nazar nahiiiN aate
jo must.haq haiN wahi haq se be-daKhal, logo

woh ghar meN mez pe kohnii Tikaaye baithi hai
thamii huii hai wahiiiN umr aajkal, logo

kisii bhi qaum kii taariiKh ke ujaale meN
tumhaare din haiN kisii raat ki naqal, logo

tamaam raat rahaa mahv e KH'aab diiwaana
kisii kii niiNd men paRtaa rahaa KHalal, logo

zaruur woh bhii kisii raaste se guzare haiN
har aadmii mujhe lagataa hai hamshakl, logo

dikhe jo paaNv ke taaza nishaan sahraa meN
to yaad aaye haiN taalaab ke kaNval, logo

woh kah rahe haiN gazalgo nahiiN rahe shaayar
maiN sun rahaa huN har ik simt se ghazal, logo

[vij...@gmail.com]

Ghazal pesh karne ka shukriia Anil sahib. mumkin hai ki aur bhii laGhzisheN ho gaii hoN aap se ise naqal karte lekin mauzoon-e-ghazal ki jo GhaltiiaaN misl-e-mehr raushan haiN, yaa misl-e-barq chamak rahii haiN:-) (sorry, couldn't help), un kii nishaan dihii kiie detaa huuN. matle ke donoN hii misree waz'n meN nahiiN haiN. aap dubaara dekh leN. sahiih suurat shayad kucch aise ho:

ye raushani hai haqiiqat meN *aik* Chhal logo
ki jaise jal meN jhalakta hai *ik* mahal logo

Regards,

Vijay

[Raj Kumar]

***janaab-e-Anil saahib :

aap ki pesh-kardah Ghazal, majmuu’ii taur par, be-Had dilchasp hai. albatta, yeh Ghazal aGhlaat se pur hai! ☹

ab yeh aGhlaat aap se sarzad hu’ii haiN yaa k Dushyant Kumar saahib se --- is baat ka faisla hamaare bas ka nahiiN hai. ba-har-Haal, apni jaanib se chaNd aek ta’assuraat haazir-e-Khidmat haiN.

pehli baat to yeh k is Ghazal ki radeef agar ‘logo’ ki bajaaye ’yaaro’ hoti to Ghazal kaheeN ziyaada dil-pazeer hoti --- but, I know, this is nothing more than just a personal opinion on my part and, hence, no reflection on anyone else!***

ye roushani hai haqiiqat meN CHal (deception), logo
ki jaise jal meN jhalakta hai mahal, logo

***jaisa k Vijay saahib ne farmaayaa hai, is matl’e ke dono misr’e Khaarij-az-baHr haiN; saHeeH matl’a Ghaaliban yuuN hai:

yeh raushanii hai Haqeeqat meN AEK chhal, logo
k jaise jal meN jhalaktaa HO IK maHal, logo***

daraKht haiN to pariNde nazar nahiiiN aate
jo must.haq haiN wahi haq se be-daKhal, logo

***First of all, must.haq should be mustaHiq.

More importantly, yahaaN saHeeH lafz ‘be-daKhal’ naheeN, ‘be-daKhl’ hai (which doesn’t even make a right qaafiya for this Ghazal). Not your fault, Anil saahib!***

woh ghar meN mez pe kohnii Tikaaye baithi hai
thamii huii hai wahiiiN umr aaj kal, logo

***bahut achchha she’r hai --- vaah, vaah!***

kisii bhi qaum kii taariiKh ke ujaale meN
tumhaare din haiN kisii raat ki naqal, logo

***be-had uljhaa hu’aa she’r hai, saaHib, --- yeh kehnaa k yeh she’r baa-ma’ani hai yaa k be-ma’ani, nihaayat mushkil hai! albatta, itnaa to keh sakte haiN k yahaaN saHeeH lafz ‘naql’ hai, na k ‘naqal’ --- goyaa, is Ghazal meN yeh qaafiya bhi naa-mauzooN hai!*** ☹

tamaam raat rahaa mahv e KH'aab diiwaana
kisii kii niiNd men paRtaa rahaa KHalal, logo

***bahut achchha she’r hai --- marHabaa-sad-marHabaa!***

zaruur woh bhii kisii raaste se guzare haiN
har aadmii mujhe lagataa hai hamshakl, logo

***Frankly, I didn’t get the luster of this gem. ;)
Even so, I must say that even though the correct word here is ‘ham-shakl’ but, unfortunately, it does not fit as a qaafiya in this Ghazal (which requires the word ‘ham-shakal’, which is blatantly wrong!*** ☹

dikhe jo paaNv ke taaza nishaan sahraa meN
to yaad aaye haiN taalaab ke kaNval, logo

***I’ll pass this one!***

woh kah rahe haiN gazalgo nahiiN rahe shaayar
maiN sun rahaa huN har ik simt se ghazal, logo

***she’r achchha hai, albatta

‘gazalgo’ should be ‘Ghazal-go’ and
‘simt’ should be ‘samt’!

baaqii sab Khairiiyat hai!

Khair-aNdesh, Raj Kumar***

[Naseer]

Raj Kumar SaaHib, aadaab 3arz hai.

kyaa yih mumkin hai kih Dushyant Kumar SaaHib ke nazdiik yih Ghazal Hindi meN ho nah kih Urdu meN? maiN yih baat kisi qism kaa tanaazu3 paidaa karne ke liye nahiiN kar rahaa balkih un tamaam alfaaz ko madd-i-nazar rakhte hu'e aisaa kah rahaa huN jin kii jaanib aap ne ishaarah kiyaa hai...

be-daKhal, naqal, ham shakal, gazalgo va-Ghairah.

merii is soch ko is baat se bhii taqviyyat miltii hai kih maqta3 meN lafz "shaayar" isti3maal hu'aa hai aur ek duusre shi3r meN lafz "dikhe". shaayad aap mujh se ittifaaq kareN ge kih "dikhe" Urdu shaa3irii meN kam hii miltaa hai. ho saktaa hai kih meraa yih xayaal Ghalat ho.

yih sab-kuchh kahne ke ba3d Hairaanii kii baat hai kih "umar" ko "umr" ne jagah nahiiN dii!

Naseer

[Anil Kala]

> yih sab-kuchh kahne ke ba3d Hairaanii kii baat hai kih "umar" ko "umr" ne jagah nahiiN dii!
>
>
>
> Naseer

Naseer sahib, Raj Kumar Sahib aur Vijay sahib

aadaab arz hai


matle meN meri hi kotaahi huii hai, sahi suurat yuN hai

ye roushani hai haqiiqat men *aik* Chal, logo
ki jaise jal meN jalaktaa *hua* mahal, logo

jaisa ke Raj Kumar sahib ne farmaaya hai mujhe bhi lagata hai ke Dushyant Kumar Ghazalgoi ke ma'amle meN maahir e fan nahiiN jaan paRte haiN..

maine ye Ghazal yahaan se naqal ki thii

http://kavitakosh.org/kk/%E0%A4%AF%E0%A5%87_%E0%A4%B0%E0%A5%8C%E0%A4%B6%E0%A4%A8%E0%A5%80_%E0%A4%B9%E0%A5%88_%E0%A4%B9%E0%A4%95%E0%A4%BC%E0%A5%80%E0%A4%95%E0%A4%BC%E0%A4%A4_%E0%A4%AE%E0%A5%87%E0%A4%82_%E0%A4%8F%E0%A4%95_%E0%A4%9B%E0%A4%B2,_%E0%A4%B2%E0%A5%8B%E0%A4%97%E0%A5%8B_/_%E0%A4%A6%E0%A5%81%E0%A4%B7%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%AF%E0%A4%82%E0%A4%A4_%E0%A4%95%E0%A5%81%E0%A4%AE%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%B0#.Um9993CmjfA

[vij...@gmail.com]

Naseer sahib, aadaab. I am not very familiar with Dushyant Kumar's poetry but he called him self a poet of 'Hindustani' language, whatever that means. Having said this, he was a good writer of 'Ghazal' in that his Ghazals, at least 3 or 4 that I have seen, all conform to the 'uruuz-e-Ghazal' properly. I will be very surprised if he has ever written 'gazal' or 'gajal' in stead of Ghazal. In the present Ghazal, all the mistakes seem to be of Anil sahib's making. Having said this, I agree that poets from Hindi background do take liberties with some of the Urdu words. Neeraj has famously used both umr and umar to fit the meter, in the same naz'm, 'kaarvaaN guzar gaya' which I had posted here a while back.

I have looked at the naagri version that Anil sahib has made available. No matter how one writes it in Roman (Anil sahib has perhaps wrongly transcribed it as shaayer), in the she'r in question, the word sha'ir seems to be in meter: so it is the same word as in Urdu.

I agree with the rest of your points, particularly 'naqal'. This seems very much to be a Hindi version in the same manner as 'umar' sometimes is.

I too will be very interested to hear Raj sahib's opinion.

Best regards,

Vijay

[Raj Kumar]

On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 3:18:48 PM UTC-7, vij...@gmail.com wrote:

Naseer sahib, aadaab. I am not very familiar with Dushyant Kumar's poetry but he called him self a poet of 'Hindustani' language, whatever that means. Having said this, he was a good writer of 'Ghazal' in that his Ghazals, at least 3 or 4 that I have seen, all conform to the 'uruuz-e-Ghazal' properly. I will be very surprised if he has ever written 'gazal' or 'gajal' in stead of Ghazal. In the present Ghazal, all the mistakes seem to be of Anil sahib's making.

***Just now, I looked at the dev-naagari version of this Ghazal and was struck by the fact how careful this poet has been in doing justice to Urdu words! There is no confusion in his writing between ‘q’ and ‘k’, between ‘Gh’ and ‘g’, between ‘z’ and ‘j’, between ‘Kh’ and ‘kh’, etc. That leaves me impressed!

I wish, most ALUPERs were at least half as careful in their transliteration as this guy is!***

Having said this, I agree that poets from Hindi background do take liberties with some of the Urdu words. Neeraj has famously used both umr and umar to fit the meter, in the same naz'm, 'kaarvaaN guzar gaya' which I had posted here a while back.

***Vijay saahib, you may view this as ‘taking liberties’ with the language but I regard this as an utter ‘disregard of language’ on their part --- when they know that the correct word is ‘umr’, why should they use ‘umar’ at all? For the sake of ‘meter’?

chaliye, isi bahaane kam-az-kam ‘meter’ ki laaj to bach gayee (varna ham to aur bhi ziyaadah ‘dukhii’ hote)! *** ;)

I have looked at the naagri version that Anil sahib has made available. No matter how one writes it in Roman (Anil sahib has perhaps wrongly transcribed it as shaayer), in the she'r in question, the word sha'ir seems to be in meter: so it is the same word as in Urdu.

***Not really, Sir. The guy clearly writes “shaayar”, not “shaa’ir” --- please double-check. In my opinion, this is not Anil saahib’s fault at all!

rahii baat ‘meter’ kii, to vaazeH ho k yahaaN ham ‘shaayar’ kaheN yaa ‘shaa’ir’, misr’a to har suurat meN bar-vazn hogaa! So, this is hardly an issue!***

I too will be very interested to hear Raj sahib's opinion.

***Huzuur, maiN ne to is mauzuu’a par apni ‘opinion’ tafseel se de di hai. albatta, aaj aek nayaa sabaq zaruur seekhaa hai --- voh yeh k ham aa’iNdah kisii bhi “Hindustaani Ghazal” ko “Urdu Ghazal” ke paimaane se nahiiN jaaNcheN ge!

Khair-aNdesh, Raj Kumar***

[Naseer]

dostaan-i-giraamii aadaab 3arz hai

We know that both in Urdu and Hindi, for یہ and وہ (Devanagri यह and वह) we usually pronounce these words akin to "ye" and "vo". It is possible that Dushyant Kumar SaaHib uses the colloquial pronunciation when he says..

ये रौशनी है हक़ीक़त में एक छल, लोगो
कि जैसे जल में झलकता हुआ महल, लोगो

वो घर में मेज़ पे कोहनी टिकाये बैठी है
थमी हुई है वहीं उम्र आजकल ,लोगो

We also know that in Urdu the plural forms for these words namely یے and وے disappeared a long time ago but ये and वे are the norm in Standard Hindi. Dushyant SaaHib employs the plural "ve" in this Ghazal and this is another reason why I thought it might have been a Hindi Ghazal.

वे कह रहे हैं ग़ज़लगो नहीं रहे शायर
मैं सुन रहा हूँ हर इक सिम्त से ग़ज़ल, लोगो.

Raj Kumar SaaHib, indeed Dushyant SaaHib has been meticulous in his employment of correct consonants like x (Kh), z, q etc. But there is a slip or should I say "laGhzish" in the word "nakal". Forgetting all this, due to daxal, nakal, shakal etc, does this Ghazal qualify as an Urdu Ghazal?

Naseer

[Raj Kumar]

On Wednesday, October 30, 2013 2:25:18 AM UTC-7, Naseer wrote:

> dostaan-i-giraamii aadaab 3arz hai
>
> We know that both in Urdu and Hindi, for یہ and وہ (Devanagri यह and वह) we usually pronounce these words akin to "ye" and "vo". It is possible that Dushyant Kumar SaaHib uses the colloquial pronunciation when he says..

>
> ये रौशनी है हक़ीक़त में एक छल, लोगो
>
> कि जैसे जल में झलकता हुआ महल, लोगो

>
> वो घर में मेज़ पे कोहनी टिकाये बैठी है
>
> थमी हुई है वहीं उम्र आजकल ,लोगो
>
> We also know that in Urdu the plural forms for these words namely یے and وے disappeared a long time ago but ये and वे are the norm in Standard Hindi. Dushyant SaaHib employs the plural "ve" in this Ghazal and this is another reason why I thought it might have been a Hindi Ghazal.

>
> वे कह रहे हैं ग़ज़लगो नहीं रहे शायर
>
> मैं सुन रहा हूँ हर इक सिम्त से ग़ज़ल, लोगो.

***janaab-e-Naseer saaHib:

jis Khurd-beenii se aap ne is Ghazal ki dev-naagari version ko dekhaa hai, us Khurd-beenii ke liye aap hamaari bharpuur daad ke mustHiq haiN. aur jo mushaahidaat aap ne alfaaz ‘yeh’, ‘voh, vGh. par kiye haiN, un se ‘ain vaazeH hai k yahaaN Dushyant saaHib baRe ‘rakh-rakhaao’ se kaam le rahe haiN --- voh aam bol-chaal ka liHaaz bhi kar rahe haiN, Urdu alfaaz ke talaffuz ka Khayaal bhi rakh rahe haiN (granting that one slip over the word ‘naql’, which he wrote as ‘nakal’), aur kaheeN kaheeN unhoN ne apni Hindi audience ki sensibilities ko bhi malHuuz-e-Khaatir rakkhaa hai!

ilaava-azeeN, un ki Ghazal ke SABHII misr’e ‘bar-vazn’ haiN --- jo k beshtar Hindi kavitaayoN ki Khaasiyat naheeN hoti! ☹

On the whole, this rendering leaves me in a fairly good mood!***

Raj Kumar SaaHib, indeed Dushyant SaaHib has been meticulous in his employment of correct consonants like x (Kh), z, q etc. But there is a slip or should I say "laGhzish" in the word "nakal". Forgetting all this, due to daxal, nakal, shakal etc, does this Ghazal qualify as an Urdu Ghazal?

***No, it doesn’t --- and, as Vijay saahib has pointed out, the poet himself doesn’t regard his Ghazals as ‘Urdu Ghazals’ but as (mere) “Hindustaani Ghazals’! ;)

And, as I have already said in my last post, I’ll not weigh a “Hindustaani Ghazal” in the same balance as an ‘Urdu Ghazal”!

In passing, I must say that what we are witnessing here today is nothing but a sad reflection on the future of Urdu Ghazal --- and, even, the future of Urdu language --- in India! ☹

Khair-aNdesh, Raj Kumar***

[Anil Kala]

On Sunday, October 27, 2013 4:54:55 PM UTC+5:30, Anil Kala wrote:
> Dushyant Kumar (1933-1975) died young. Mostly wrote in Hindi but few ghazals also....
>
>
>
>
>
> ye roushani hai haqiiqat meN CHal (deception), logo
>
> ki jaise jal meN jhalakta hai mahal, logo
>
>

I don't consider poetry as some kind of extension of math. The ghazal I had presented was for a slightly different perspective of poet and not for its structural aspect. For me, as long as it has lyricality, an easy flow of language and some exhilarating idea, it is good enough....

Here is one more ...

maiN jise oDhtaa biCHaataa huN
woh ghazal aapko sunaataa huN

aik jangal hai terii aaNkoN meN
maiN jahaaN raah bhuul jaataa huN

tu kisii rail sii guzartii hai
maiN kisii pul saa thartharaataa huN

har taraf aitraaz hotaa hai
maiN agar roushani meN aataa huN

aik baazu ukhaR gayaa jab se
aur zyaaada vazan uThaataa huN

maiN tujhe bhuulne ki koshish meN
aaj kitne qariib paataa huN

kaun ye faasala nibhaayegaa
maiN farishtaa huN sach bataataa hun

- Dushyant Kumar

[Naseer]

On Thursday, 31 October 2013 05:37:34 UTC, Anil Kala wrote:

"I don't consider poetry as some kind of extension of math. The ghazal I had presented was for a slightly different perspective of poet and not for its structural aspect. For me, as long as it has lyricality, an easy flow of language and some exhilarating idea, it is good enough...."

Kala SaaHib, aadaab 3arz hai

We discussed something similar here.

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/alt.language.urdu.poetry/biryaanii/alt.language.urdu.poetry/d2DtmERMeys/4uTkB4d59IwJ

You have often posted Urdu Ghazals, including those of someone given the title of "xudaa-i-suxan". Without their "mathematical structural aspect", would they have had the flow of language and "lyricality" that you speak of? Would Taj Mahal be the same without its symmetry? vaise soch apnii apnii aur pasand apnii apnii.

Taking another analogy (and according to Vijay SaaHib, my analogies are not good at all!:-)), I believe one drives on the left hand side in India. One could easily go from A to B driving on the right hand side. Yet, the law of the land says people must drive on the left. People who breach this law will cause chaos on the roads! The "law" of Urdu poetry, especially Ghazal poetry is that it must conform to certain rules and regulations that have been set out by the masters over the ages and this breach of its order will and does cause chaos.

Naseer

[Anil Kala]

Naseer Saahib do you remember once Zafar saahib had posted a nazm in regular meter(I think 'SaHaraa') without formatting it in poetry style?

Only recently I had pointed out that a misra of Raj Kumar's ghazal sounded like hard prose? The point is mere meter does not guarantee lyricality and out of meter can also be very lyrical. As to would Taj Mahal be what it is without geometric symmetry? No it wouldn't be but would it be Taj without asymmetry in patterns and designs? A machine can produce highly dazzling symmetrical pattern but would it pass of as work of art? We need asymmetry and distortion to enhance attributes an equivalent of hyperbole in literature, that's what modern art is all about. Even so, I think 'idea'of a work of art is central and structural aspect merely facilitators. Miir wouldn't be Miir without the content of his poetry, after all there are thousands of other poets who could write poetry in strict accordance to rules of prosody.

But I have no complaints if others stick to strict rules of prosody. As you say, pasaNd apni, Khayaal apna. After all it isn't West that has taught us the idea of freedom of expression, to accept opposing ideas. According to an old myth, in ancient times when plays were made to ridicule 'Daanav' (demons) and glorify 'Devata' (Gods), the Rakshas were incensed. Indra then decried absolutely anything can be said within the four corners of the stage. Thereafter plays were made in which Gods were lampooned. Part of Natya Shashtra.

So to each his pasand and respectful disagreement.

[vij...@gmail.com]

On Thursday, 31 October 2013 10:51:30 UTC, Naseer wrote:

>
> Kala SaaHib, aadaab 3arz hai
>

>

> Taking another analogy (and according to Vijay SaaHib, my analogies are not good at all!:-)), I believe one drives on the left hand side in India.

This is not fair Naseer sahib. I have not implied ever that your 'analogies' are not good at all! I did once made a comment about one analogy (note: not plural but singular: analogy)you had employed and so far as I remember, that was just the one incident. And this current one about driving on the right is number 2:-)

BTW, when you talked about Tajmahal, I honestly thought you meant Sahir's Tajmahal, and not Mumtaz's!

Best regards,

Vijay

[Naseer]

On Thursday, 31 October 2013 12:34:23 UTC, Anil Kala wrote:

"But I have no complaints if others stick to strict rules of prosody. As you say, pasaNd apni, Khayaal apna. So to each his pasand and respectful disagreement."

Kala SaaHib, is mauzuu3 par maziid baHs be-suud ho gii. jaate jaate sirf itnaa kahuuN gaa kih "xalal", "kal", "kaNval" aur "Ghazal" .... "naql", "shakl" aur "daxl" ke ham-qaafiyah nahiiN. isii binaa par yih Urdu Ghazal nahiiN kahii jaa saktii. qaafiyah milaanaa bhii har kisii ke bas kaa rog nahiiN. lagtaa hai kih yahaaN Dushyant SaaHib ko mauzuuN qaafiye ke intixaab ne maat kar diyaa hai!!

haaN, yih nah samajhiye gaa kih maiN "lakiir kaa faqiir" huuN. mere xayaalaat kaa shaayad aap is laRii se andaazah lagaa leN.

http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=2170492&highlight=Restrictions

Naseer

[Anil Kala]

>
> Kala SaaHib, is mauzuu3 par maziid baHs be-suud ho gii. jaate jaate sirf itnaa kahuuN gaa kih "xalal", "kal", "kaNval" aur "Ghazal" .... "naql", "shakl" aur "daxl" ke ham-qaafiyah nahiiN. isii binaa par yih Urdu Ghazal nahiiN kahii jaa saktii. qaafiyah milaanaa bhii har kisii ke bas kaa rog nahiiN. lagtaa hai kih yahaaN Dushyant SaaHib ko mauzuuN qaafiye ke intixaab ne maat kar diyaa hai!!
>
>
>
> haaN, yih nah samajhiye gaa kih maiN "lakiir kaa faqiir" huuN. mere xayaalaat kaa shaayad aap is laRii se andaazah lagaa leN.
>
>
>
> http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=2170492&highlight=Restrictions
>
>
>
> Naseer

Janaab yahaaN bhi kalam paini aur davaat siyaahi se labaalab bhari hai. pahla chouka hamari taraf se sambhaliye ....

Dusyant saahib ki ghazal meN masala qaafiye ka hai hi nahiiN, masla hai lafzon ki purity ka chuNke jo lafz ghazal meN istema'al hue haiN woh ham-qaafiya to haiN lekin pure shakl meN nahiiN haiN.

"ham to *din ba din* buRhe ho rahe haiN aap roz ba roz jawaan hote jaa rahe haiN"

[b_man...@yahoo.com]

"ham to *din ba din* buRhe ho rahe haiN aap roz ba roz jawaan hote jaa rahe haiN"

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
am I correct in assuming that, the actual problem here is- again-

that of,...

"BhaNg ke KullhaR kahaaN, SeHba ke Paimaane kahaaN" ??!

======================================================================