ek sher ka matlab!
Jay Shergill
Firaq Gorakhpuri Sahib ka ek sher post kar raha hoo.n.
meherbaani kar ke iss ka matlab bayaan kare.n:
yeh sukoot-e-naaz, yeh dil kii rago.n ka TooTna
khaamoshi mei.n shikast-e-saaz kii baatei.n karo
mujhe khas taur pe "dil kii rago.n ka TooTna" phrase ka istemaal bahut
pasand aaya. magar sher ke context mei.n isse samajhne mei.n pareshaani ho
rahi hai. yeh bhi darkhawaast hai aap sab se kii agar aap ke ilm mei.n kisi
aur ghazal mei.n iss, ya iss ke kareebi kisi phrase ka istemaal kiya gaya
hai, to meherbaani kar usse bhi post kar dei.n
Shukriya,
Jay 'Qafas' Shergill
mar te jaa.n par Dar hai damma waaleyo,
dharat vi vikdi hai mul shamshaan di
- Shiv Kumar Batalvi
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Ali Minai
Jay Shergill <ashe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>adaab everyone,
> Firaq Gorakhpuri Sahib ka ek sher post kar raha hoo.n.
>meherbaani kar ke iss ka matlab bayaan kare.n:
>
>yeh sukoot-e-naaz, yeh dil kii rago.n ka TooTna
>khaamoshi mei.n shikast-e-saaz kii baatei.n karo
The second line of the she'r should be:
KHAmuSHI mEN kuCHh SHikast-E sAz kI bAtEN karO
A very rough explanation:
Unable to stand her haughty silence, the poet says to his Beloved,
``You are silent while the veins of my heart stretch and snap;
Break this silence with some talk of a broken (musical) instrument''
The poet is making an analogy between his breaking heart and a breaking
musical instrument. He is heartbroken at his Beloved's silence, and is
trying to use this heartbreak as a pretext to get her to break her
silence. Neat!
The effect of the she'r owes more to the immediacy of feeling than
to logical clarity --- a typical Firaq trait. He was, above all, a
poet of delicate feelings and sensuality, as exemplified by his
famous, immortal lines:
tum muKHAtib bhi ho, qarIb bhi ho;
tum ko dEkhUN ke tum se bAt karUN?
ham se kyA hO sakA muhabbat mEN?
tum ne tO KHaEr bE-vafAI kI!
zarA visAl ke bAd AinA to dEkh, aE dOst!
tirE jamAl ki dOSHIzagI nikhar AI!
Since you brought it up, here are more she'rs from the ghazal:
SHAm-e GHam kuCHh us nigAh-E nAz kI bAtEN karO.
bEKHudI baRhtI CHalI hae, rAz kI bAtEN karO.
yeH sukUt-E nAz, yeh dil kI ragON kA TUTnA!
KHAmushI mEN kuCHh SHikast-E sAz kI bAtEN karO.
nkhat-E zulf-E parISHAN, dAstAn-E SHAm-e GHam;
subh hOnE tak isI andAz kI bAtEN karO.
har rag-E dil vajd mEN AtI rahE, dukhtI rahE;
yUN hi us kE jA-o bE-jA nAz kI bAtEN karO.
jO adam kI jAn haE, jO haE payAm-E zindigI;
us sukUt-E rAz, us AvAz kI bAtEN karO.
iSHq rusvA hO CHala, bE-kaEf sA, bEzAr sA;
Aj us kI nargis-E GHammAz kI bAtEN karO.
kis liyE uzr-E taGHaful? kis liyE ilzAm-e iSHq?
Aj CHarKH-E tafraqA-pardAz kI bAtEN karO.
jis ki ulfat nE palaT dI iSHq kI kAyA, firAq,
Aj usI IsA-nafas damsAz kI bAtEN karO.
I'm sure there are other she'rs in this, since Firaq never
wrote a short ghazal:-), but these are all I know.
Ali Minai
-------------------------------------------------------------
husn ki KHud-SHinAsiyAN iSHq ki bE-KHudI meN thIN;
tujh ko harIm-e nAz mEN, maEn ne tirA patA diyA. Firaq
-------------------------------------------------------------
--
Ali Minai
rajkp...@my-dejanews.com
ami...@holmes.ececs.uc.edu (Ali Minai) wrote:
> In article <7etvsp$kqh$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
> Jay Shergill <ashe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >adaab everyone,
> > Firaq Gorakhpuri Sahib ka ek sher post kar raha hoo.n.
> >meherbaani kar ke is ka matlab bayaan kare.n:
> >
> >yeh sukoot-e-naaz, yeh dil kii rago.n ka TooTna
> >khaamoshi mei.n shikast-e-saaz kii baatei.n karo
---------
> The second line of the she'r should be:
>
> KHAmuSHI mEN kuCHh SHikast-E sAz kI bAtEN karO
Indeed, the second line of this she'r should be as written by Ali Minai
Sahib. I may, in this connection, point out that we do have at our disposal
three alternatives 'khamoshi', 'khaamoshi' and 'khaamushi'. The meter of this
ghazal requires that the third version be used.
> A very rough explanation:
>
> Unable to stand her haughty silence, the poet says to his Beloved,
> ``You are silent while the veins of my heart stretch and snap;
> Break this silence with some talk of a broken (musical) instrument''
>
> The poet is making an analogy between his breaking heart and a breaking
> musical instrument. He is heartbroken at his Beloved's silence, and is
> trying to use this heartbreak as a pretext to get her to break her
> silence. Neat!
I am afraid the poet here is NOT addressing his beloved; she stays in the
'third person' while he is addressing his 'halqa-e-aihbaab' that happens to
be around him. I can say this with some degree of confidence since I have
heard Firaq himself recite this ghazal. His emphases during recitation left
no doubt that 'his mehbooba' wasn't present at the scene and he was
essentially saying to those present around him ----------
ke aaj ki shaam meri tabi'at aur mere rohjaan ka kuchh aisa aalam hai ke,
yoonhi roz-marra ki guft-o-shuneed ki bajaaye, aaj to kuchh aur hi andaaz ki
baateN karne aur sun'ne ko jee chaahata hai. woh baateN, jahaaN tak mumkin
ho, hamaari mehbooba ki jumla-sifaat se mut'alliq honi chaahiyeN --- [aur
phir Firaq Sahib apni ghazal ke mukhtalif ash'aar mein un jumla-sifaat par
raushni daalte haiN].
is zimn mein aap note karen ke is ghazal ke 10 ash'aar mein se 6 ash'aar mein
(jin mein matla' bhi shaamil hai) yeh baat ba-khoobi waazeh hai (aur baaqi
ash'aar mein bhi kuchh aise hi ishaare maujood haiN). maslan,
1. shaam-e-gham kuchh US nigaah-e-naaz ki baateN karo
2. yoon hi US ke jaa-o-bejaa naaz ki baateN karo
3. aaj US ki nargis-e-ghammaaz ki baateN karo
4. DOSTO! US nau-bahaar-e-naaz ki baateN karo
5. aaj kuchh US naaz US andaaz ki baateN karo
6. aaj US eesa-nafas dam-saaz ki baateN karo
main jaanta hoon ke gahzal ke mukhtalif ash'aar aek doosre se aazaad hote
haiN, magar yeh bhi aek maani hui baat hai ke aek achhchha shaa'ir apni poori
ghazal ke dauraan aek khaas maahaul (yaani, ambience) barqaraar rakhta hai.
is liye, main yeh samajhta hoon ke zer-e-baihs she'r mein bhi aashiq ka
khitaab apne dostoN se hai ( agarche woh baateN kar rahaa hai apni mehbooba
ki).
----------
jahaaN tak she'r ke m'aani ka ta'aluq hai, aashiq apni mehbooba ki maghroor
(aur mustaqil) khaamushi ka zikr karte huey apne aihbaab ko bataa rahaa hai
ke is sulook se us ki kitni dil-shikani hui hai. is dil-shikani ko Firaq
Sahib ne apne makhsoos andaaz mein aek nihaayat dramatic shakl di hai. aam
taur par, dil ke tootne ko kisi khilaune ya kisi aa'ine ke tootne se tashbeeh
di jaati hai aur kabhi kabhi kisi saaz se bhi. magar yeh 'dil ki ragoN ka
tootna' --- jaise kisi saaz ke taar toot rahe hoN --- keh kar Firaq Sahib ne
aek aisa original andaaz-e-bayaaN pesh kiya hai jis ki imagery
qaabil-e-taihseen hai.
apni aur apne dil ki yeh haalat bataane ke b'aad, won apne aihbaab se
darkh(w)aast karte haiN ke "aao, kuchh aisi baateN karo jin ka ta'alluq
khaamushi se ho aur us khaamushi ke darmiyaan kisi saaz ke tootne se ho!
goya, saaz koi naghmaat paida naheen kar sakaa; sirf us ke tootne ki aavaaz
hi hai jis ne khaamushi ko torhaa hai! saaf zaahir hai ke woh apne aihbaab ke
saath sirf unheen mauzoo'aat par guftgoo karna chaahate haiN jo un ke
aashiqaana jazbaat ke aaeena-daar hoN.
-----------
Jay Sahib ko Firaq Sahib ki yeh bandish itni pasand aayee hai ke woh yeh bhi
jaan-na chaahate haiN ke kya aisi tarkeeb kisi aur shaa'ir ne bhi baandhi hai.
jawaaban arz hai ke 'ragoN' ka zikr to kayi jagah aaya hai magar theek 'dil ki
ragoN ke tootne' ka zikr to hum ne Firaq Sahib hi se sunaa hai. vaise, isi
ghazal mein unhoN ne aek aur jagah farmaaya hai:
har RAG-e-DIL vajd mein aati rahe, dukhti rahe
yoon hi us ke jaa-o-bejaa naaz ki baateN karo
aaj se kayi sadiyaaN pehle, Hazrat Amir Khusro ne farmaaya tha ke
kaafir-e-ishqam, musalmaani miraa darkaar neist
har RAG-e-man taar gashta, haajat-e-zunnaar neist
{Now, please don't ask me to write a column on this one!] :-))
isi silsile mein Saahir Hoshiarpuri ka aek she'r dekhiye:
hum tiri yaad se baihlaaye huye the DIL ko
kya khabar thi ke yeh RAG-RAG mein utar jaaye gi
ab chalte-chalte isi zimn mein khaaksaar ki aek ghazal ka yeh she'r bhi sun
leejiye:
ab to RAG-RAG se tapakta hai lahoo
sur nikalte naheeN in taaroN se (taar = string)
Before signing off, I would like to tell you that when I was planning to give
a session on Firaq last fall, this particular ghazal --- so powerful, so
meaningful and so beautiful --- was on my short list; it didn't, however,
make to the top at that time.
khair-andesh, Raj Kumar
Ali Minai
<rajkp...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>In article <7eufqh$gag$1...@news.ececs.uc.edu>,
> ami...@holmes.ececs.uc.edu (Ali Minai) wrote:
>
>> In article <7etvsp$kqh$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
>> Jay Shergill <ashe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> >adaab everyone,
>> > Firaq Gorakhpuri Sahib ka ek sher post kar raha hoo.n.
>> >meherbaani kar ke is ka matlab bayaan kare.n:
>> >
>> >yeh sukoot-e-naaz, yeh dil kii rago.n ka TooTna
>> >khaamoshi mei.n shikast-e-saaz kii baatei.n karo
>
>---------
>
>> The second line of the she'r should be:
>>
>> KHAmuSHI mEN kuCHh SHikast-E sAz kI bAtEN karO
>
>Indeed, the second line of this she'r should be as written by Ali Minai
>Sahib. I may, in this connection, point out that we do have at our disposal
>three alternatives 'khamoshi', 'khaamoshi' and 'khaamushi'. The meter of this
>ghazal requires that the third version be used.
That's right. I use the following convention: All long vowels are
represented by upper case letters and all short ones by lower-case.
Similarly, all cases where `h' cmbines with a consonant to produce
a new sound (as in `CH', `SH', `KH', `GH'), I use caps, and where `h'
only adds aspiration, I use lower-case. I use N to indicate the nasalized
`nUn'. Finally, I represent the hard T, D and R with caps, the soft ones
with lower-case. Like all conventions, this has its flaws, but I've
found it adequate.
>
>> A very rough explanation:
>>
>> Unable to stand her haughty silence, the poet says to his Beloved,
>> ``You are silent while the veins of my heart stretch and snap;
>> Break this silence with some talk of a broken (musical) instrument''
>>
>> The poet is making an analogy between his breaking heart and a breaking
>> musical instrument. He is heartbroken at his Beloved's silence, and is
>> trying to use this heartbreak as a pretext to get her to break her
>> silence. Neat!
>
>I am afraid the poet here is NOT addressing his beloved; she stays in the
>'third person' while he is addressing his 'halqa-e-aihbaab' that happens to
>be around him. I can say this with some degree of confidence since I have
>heard Firaq himself recite this ghazal. His emphases during recitation left
>no doubt that 'his mehbooba' wasn't present at the scene and he was
>essentially saying to those present around him ----------
>
>ke aaj ki shaam meri tabi'at aur mere rohjaan ka kuchh aisa aalam hai ke,
^^^^^^^
With apologies, Firaq would probably have said `rujhAn' rather than
`ruhjAn':-).
>yoonhi roz-marra ki guft-o-shuneed ki bajaaye, aaj to kuchh aur hi andaaz ki
>baateN karne aur sun'ne ko jee chaahata hai. woh baateN, jahaaN tak mumkin
>ho, hamaari mehbooba ki jumla-sifaat se mut'alliq honi chaahiyeN --- [aur
>phir Firaq Sahib apni ghazal ke mukhtalif ash'aar mein un jumla-sifaat par
>raushni daalte haiN].
>
>is zimn mein aap note karen ke is ghazal ke 10 ash'aar mein se 6 ash'aar mein
>(jin mein matla' bhi shaamil hai) yeh baat ba-khoobi waazeh hai (aur baaqi
>ash'aar mein bhi kuchh aise hi ishaare maujood haiN). maslan,
>
>1. shaam-e-gham kuchh US nigaah-e-naaz ki baateN karo
>
>2. yoon hi US ke jaa-o-bejaa naaz ki baateN karo
>
>3. aaj US ki nargis-e-ghammaaz ki baateN karo
>
>4. DOSTO! US nau-bahaar-e-naaz ki baateN karo
>
>5. aaj kuchh US naaz US andaaz ki baateN karo
>
>6. aaj US eesa-nafas dam-saaz ki baateN karo
>
>main jaanta hoon ke gahzal ke mukhtalif ash'aar aek doosre se aazaad hote
>haiN, magar yeh bhi aek maani hui baat hai ke aek achhchha shaa'ir apni poori
>ghazal ke dauraan aek khaas maahaul (yaani, ambience) barqaraar rakhta hai.
>is liye, main yeh samajhta hoon ke zer-e-baihs she'r mein bhi aashiq ka
>khitaab apne dostoN se hai ( agarche woh baateN kar rahaa hai apni mehbooba
>ki).
This is an excellent point, and I largely agree. Firaq especially
was quite fond of ghazals with a continuous theme. By itself, however,
the she'r is, IMHO, more compatible with the notion that that
practiotioner of the sukUt is present, since the poet begins with
`yeh sukUt-E nAz', which suggests an immediately palpable silence
rather than the beloved's abstract, distant lack of communication.
Still, I agree that, in the context of the other verses, your reading
is what Firaq meant.
Interestingly, I found a variant reading of the she'r in a book:
yeh sukUt-E yAs, yeh dil kI ragON kA TUTnA
Now that would fit very easily into the reading that the poet is
addressing his companions rather than the beloved. The silence then
is the silence of his own despondency.
BTW, your anecdote raises a point that has caused controversy for ever:
Does a work of art `mean' only what its creator intended it to mean, or
is it an entity interpretable in its own right? The issue of `original
intent' is just as important in art as in law or religion. Me, I think
it is nice to know the artist's intent, but the work stands on its own,
and ultimately creates its own meanings in different minds and different
times. That is what distinuishes a living work of art from a dead piece
of text or daub of paint.
>
>jahaaN tak she'r ke m'aani ka ta'aluq hai, aashiq apni mehbooba ki maghroor
>(aur mustaqil) khaamushi ka zikr karte huey apne aihbaab ko bataa rahaa hai
>ke is sulook se us ki kitni dil-shikani hui hai. is dil-shikani ko Firaq
>Sahib ne apne makhsoos andaaz mein aek nihaayat dramatic shakl di hai. aam
>taur par, dil ke tootne ko kisi khilaune ya kisi aa'ine ke tootne se tashbeeh
>di jaati hai aur kabhi kabhi kisi saaz se bhi. magar yeh 'dil ki ragoN ka
>tootna' --- jaise kisi saaz ke taar toot rahe hoN --- keh kar Firaq Sahib ne
>aek aisa original andaaz-e-bayaaN pesh kiya hai jis ki imagery
>qaabil-e-taihseen hai.
Actually, the analogy between the heart and stringed instruments has been
around in Persian and Urdu. I cannot think of any classical examples offhand,
but Faiz' famous early poem, `yAs' comes to mind:
barbat-E dil ke tAr TUT gayE;
heEN zamIN-bOs rAhatON ke mahal;
miT gayE qissa-hA-e fikr-o amal;
bazm-e hastI ke jAm phUT gayE;
CHhin gayA kaEf-e kaOsar-O tasnIm.
zehmat-E girya-O bukA bE-sUd!
SHikva-E baKHt-e nA-rasA bE-sUd!
hO CHukA KHatm rehmatON ka nuzUl.
band haE muddatON se bAb-e qubUl.
bE-niAz-E duA hae rabb-e karIm.
bujh gaI sham'e ArzU-e jamIl;
yAd bAqI hae, bE-kasI ki dalIl.
intizAr-E fuzUl rehnE dE!
rAz-e ulfat nibAhnE vAlE,
bAr-e GHam sE karAhnE vAle,
kAviSH-E bE-husUl rehnE dE.
I think Faiz has used `barbat-e dil ke tAr' in other places too.
>
>Jay Sahib ko Firaq Sahib ki yeh bandish itni pasand aayee hai ke woh yeh bhi
>jaan-na chaahate haiN ke kya aisi tarkeeb kisi aur shaa'ir ne bhi baandhi hai.
>jawaaban arz hai ke 'ragoN' ka zikr to kayi jagah aaya hai magar theek 'dil ki
>ragoN ke tootne' ka zikr to hum ne Firaq Sahib hi se sunaa hai. vaise, isi
>ghazal mein unhoN ne aek aur jagah farmaaya hai:
>
>har RAG-e-DIL vajd mein aati rahe, dukhti rahe
>yoon hi us ke jaa-o-bejaa naaz ki baateN karo
>
>aaj se kayi sadiyaaN pehle, Hazrat Amir Khusro ne farmaaya tha ke
>
>kaafir-e-ishqam, musalmaani miraa darkaar neist
>har RAG-e-man taar gashta, haajat-e-zunnaar neist
A minor modification: The first line should read:
kAfar-E eSHqam, musalmAnI marA darkAr nIst
In Farsi (and classical Urdu poetry), one says `kAfar', not `kAfir',
which is why Ghalib could say,
CHhORE na KHalq gO mujhe kAfar kahE baGHaEr
in the same ghazal as
ghar jab banA liyA tire dar par kahE baGHaEr,
samjhE ga ab bhi tU na mirA ghar kahE baGHaEr!
Or Iqbal:
mujhE batA to sahI aOr kAfarI kyA haE?
in the ghazal
nigAh-e faqr meN SHAn-E sikandarI kyA haE?
Also, `marA' is a slightly shortened form of `mA rA', or `mujh kO',
so it should be `marA', not `mirA'.
>
>{Now, please don't ask me to write a column on this one!] :-))
See, if you don't write it, others will:-).
>
>isi silsile mein Saahir Hoshiarpuri ka aek she'r dekhiye:
>
>hum tiri yaad se baihlaaye huye the DIL ko
>kya khabar thi ke yeh RAG-RAG mein utar jaaye gi
>
>ab chalte-chalte isi zimn mein khaaksaar ki aek ghazal ka yeh she'r bhi sun
>leejiye:
>
>ab to RAG-RAG se tapakta hai lahoo
>sur nikalte naheeN in taaroN se (taar = string)
Very nice!
>Before signing off, I would like to tell you that when I was planning to give
>a session on Firaq last fall, this particular ghazal --- so powerful, so
>meaningful and so beautiful --- was on my short list; it didn't, however,
>make to the top at that time.
If you have time, perhaps you could post some that did make the cut.
Ali Minai
------------------------------------------------------------------------
na pUCHh Alam-e bargaSHta-tAle'I, Atash:
barasti Ag jo bArAN ki ArzU kartE. Atash
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Ali Minai
Jas Parmar
the phrase in question has also been used by Kaifi Azmi in his
wonderful ghazal "aaj socha to aansoo bhar aaye" (with the punchline
being "mudate.n ho gayee.n muskaraaye"). The particular sher is:
dil ki naazuk rage.n tootati hain
yaad itna bhi koyee naa aaye!
I'm sure that you will appreciate the subtlety of the emotion being
expressed in the above sher (and not a single izaafat in sight :-))
(lata has song this ghazal in the film "hanste zakham" - well worth a listen).
regards
Jas
Jay Shergill (ashe...@yahoo.com) wrote:
: adaab everyone,
: Firaq Gorakhpuri Sahib ka ek sher post kar raha hoo.n.
: meherbaani kar ke iss ka matlab bayaan kare.n:
: yeh sukoot-e-naaz, yeh dil kii rago.n ka TooTna
: khaamoshi mei.n shikast-e-saaz kii baatei.n karo
: mujhe khas taur pe "dil kii rago.n ka TooTna" phrase ka istemaal bahut
: pasand aaya. magar sher ke context mei.n isse samajhne mei.n pareshaani ho
: rahi hai. yeh bhi darkhawaast hai aap sab se kii agar aap ke ilm mei.n kisi
: aur ghazal mei.n iss, ya iss ke kareebi kisi phrase ka istemaal kiya gaya
: hai, to meherbaani kar usse bhi post kar dei.n
: Shukriya,
: Jay 'Qafas' Shergill
: mar te jaa.n par Dar hai damma waaleyo,
: dharat vi vikdi hai mul shamshaan di
: - Shiv Kumar Batalvi
: -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
ahm...@noka.ub.bw
ami...@holmes.ececs.uc.edu (Ali Minai) wrote:
> In article <7f0kbd$u4k$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
> <rajkp...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
> >In article <7eufqh$gag$1...@news.ececs.uc.edu>,
> > ami...@holmes.ececs.uc.edu (Ali Minai) wrote:
> >
> >> In article <7etvsp$kqh$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
> >> Jay Shergill <ashe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> >adaab everyone,
> >> > Firaq Gorakhpuri Sahib ka ek sher post kar raha hoo.n.
> >> >meherbaani kar ke is ka matlab bayaan kare.n:
> >> >
> >> >yeh sukoot-e-naaz, yeh dil kii rago.n ka TooTna
> >> >khaamoshi mei.n shikast-e-saaz kii baatei.n karo
> >> The second line of the she'r should be:
> >> KHAmuSHI mEN kuCHh SHikast-E sAz kI bAtEN karO
> >> A very rough explanation:
> >>
> >> Unable to stand her haughty silence, the poet says to his Beloved,
> >> ``You are silent while the veins of my heart stretch and snap;
> >> Break this silence with some talk of a broken (musical) instrument''
> >>
> >> The poet is making an analogy between his breaking heart and a breaking
> >> musical instrument. He is heartbroken at his Beloved's silence, and is
> >> trying to use this heartbreak as a pretext to get her to break her
> >> silence. Neat!
> >
> >I am afraid the poet here is NOT addressing his beloved; she stays in the
> >'third person' while he is addressing his 'halqa-e-aihbaab' that happens to
> >be around him. I can say this with some degree of confidence since I have
> >heard Firaq himself recite this ghazal. His emphases during recitation left
> >no doubt that 'his mehbooba' wasn't present at the scene and he was
> >essentially saying to those present around him ----------
> >
> >ke aaj ki shaam meri tabi'at aur mere rohjaan ka kuchh aisa aalam hai ke,
> >yoonhi roz-marra ki guft-o-shuneed ki bajaaye, aaj to kuchh aur hi andaaz ki
> >baateN karne aur sun'ne ko jee chaahata hai. woh baateN, jahaaN tak mumkin
> >ho, hamaari mehbooba ki jumla-sifaat se mut'alliq honi chaahiyeN --- [aur
> >phir Firaq Sahib apni ghazal ke mukhtalif ash'aar mein un jumla-sifaat par
> >raushni daalte haiN].
> >
I am uncomfortable with the notion that a she'r can have only one
interpretation. If this were so, Ghalib's appeal to many of us would be
considerably reduced. One of the factors that makes Urdu (and to an even
greater extent, Farsi) pre-eminently suitable for poetry is the ambiguity
inherent in these languages. You could not achieve the same quality in a
precise language such as Arabic.
I quite agree that as to what the poet himself meant by the she'r is quite
irrelevant to what it might, legitimately, mean to US. We know, for example,
that the theme of homosexual love is common among the works of the greatest of
Urdu poets. Yet, whenever we come across a she'r which talks about love, we
invariably interpret it according to our own inclinations, which, for most of
us, might mean the love for a person of the opposite sex. Surely we then don't
stick to what the poet was thinking at the time of writing. Of course, when
the poet explicitly spells out his preference, as in the case of many ash'aar
of Mir Taqi Mir, Aaatish and many others, we don't have much choice. But that
does not stop us from interpreting the rest of the body of the poet's work the
way they appeal to us. Even after reading ash'aar of Mir such as:
Yaar ki in bholi baaton par na jaa ai hamnasheen
Aik fitna hai wuh, us ko aah mat laRkaa samajh.
Mir ki 'ayyaariaan ma'aloom nahin laRkon ko
Karte hain kiya kiya adaayen us ko saada saa samajh.,
or,
Kiyaa us aatisbaaz ke launday ka itna shauq Mir
beh chali hai dekh kar us ko tumhaari raal kuchh,
when we come to:
Wuh kiaa cheez thi, aah, jis ke liye
Har ik cheez se dil uthaa kar chale,
we don't bother as to who Mir actually had in his mind when writing this; we
interpret it according to our inclination.
As to the plurality of interpretation, Ghalib's poetry is especially amenable
to it. The she'r quoted by Nagesh Sahib recently:
Koi veeraani si veeraani hai
Dasht ko dekh kar ghar yaad aaya,
might mean, at one level:
"The desolation of desert reminds me of the ruin of my own home."
or, it might mean:
"The desolation of the desert makes me homesick for the comfort of my home."
or it might mean:
"I looked at the wasteland (with contempt) and thought: Do they call THIS
desolation? To see real desolation, they should see MY HOUSE."
Who knows what Ghalib really meant? Maybe all three, maybe something entirely
different. All I know is, the last interpretation appeals to me.
One other point of the discussion: the accepted pronunciation of the word is
indeed 'kaafir' in all the three languages; Arabic, Urdu and Farsi. However,
when the word is used in a 'qaafia' many times it used as kaafar, since it
rhymes with more words that way; ghar, dar, pathar, gar, nazar, tar etc. Try
looking for words rhyming with kaafir, and the reason becomes apparent. This
reminds me of a Farsi she'r:
za shaikh-e-shehr jaan burdam ba tazweer-e-musalmaani.
madaara gar ba een kaafar na-mee kardam cheh mee kardam.
[I saved myself from the city's shaikh (religous leader) by using this
lie of being a (good) Muslim. If I had not depended on this kaafir
(deception), what could have I done?]
Jamil.
Ali Minai
>
>I am uncomfortable with the notion that a she'r can have only one
>interpretation. If this were so, Ghalib's appeal to many of us would be
>considerably reduced. One of the factors that makes Urdu (and to an even
>greater extent, Farsi) pre-eminently suitable for poetry is the ambiguity
>inherent in these languages. You could not achieve the same quality in a
>precise language such as Arabic.
Well said!
>......
>
>One other point of the discussion: the accepted pronunciation of the word is
>indeed 'kaafir' in all the three languages; Arabic, Urdu and Farsi. However,
>when the word is used in a 'qaafia' many times it used as kaafar, since it
>rhymes with more words that way; ghar, dar, pathar, gar, nazar, tar etc. Try
>looking for words rhyming with kaafir, and the reason becomes apparent. This
>reminds me of a Farsi she'r:
Yes, indeed, the correct pronunciation of the word in Arabic and Urdu is
`kAfir', and that is also considered correct in Persian. However, for some
reason, classical Persian poets invariably used the word as `kAfar', and
not as `kAfir'. I've been trying to think of examples, with no success ---
though they may exist. In Urdu, I'm sure it would be easy to find the
word used as `kAfir' in recent works, but classical poets writing with the
Farsi model before them always used `kAfar'. I personally would certainly
have no hesitation using `kAfir' in a she'r.
Availability of rhymes may have something to do with it, but I was able
to come up with the following familiar words to rhyme with `kAfir' in
about 3 minutes:
zAhir, hAzir, mAhir, sAhir, qAdir, SHAtir, KHAtir, SHA'ir, nAzir,
tA'ir, jAbir, AKHir, nAsir, tAjir, musAfir, muhAjir, mufakkir,
musavvir, mujAvir, ma'Asir, maqAbir, mazAhir, manAzir, asAkir.....
I'm sure there are many more. And note that all the words are Arabic,
so they were available to Farsi poets too. This is hardly a difficult
rhyme. Perhaps some of the rhymes were not considered poetic enough.
>za shaikh-e-shehr jaan burdam ba tazweer-e-musalmaani.
>madaara gar ba een kaafar na-mee kardam cheh mee kardam.
> [I saved myself from the city's shaikh (religous leader) by using this
>lie of being a (good) Muslim. If I had not depended on this kaafir
>(deception), what could have I done?]
A small correction here: The first word in line 2 is not `madArA'
but `mudArA', which means `caution', `compromise', or `temporization'.
Thus, the `kAfar' actually refers to the `SHEKH', and the line means:
``What could I do but deal cautiously with this infidel (the SHEKH-e SHehr)?''.
This is the same word as in Hafez' famous she'r:
AsAyeSH-e du-gItI, tafsIr-e in do-harf-ast:
bA dUstan `muruvvat'; bA duSHmanan `mudArA'.
(Happiness in both worlds is the elaboration of these two statements:
With friends, magnanimity; with enemies, caution.)
In fact, this she'r itself is an example of beautiful ambiguity, since
`do-harf' can be taken to mean ``two statements'' as well as ``two
letters''. The two statements are, of course, obvious. But also note
that the statements have the structure:
dUstan <-> muruvvat
duSHmanan <-> mudArA
d-------- <-> m-------
Thus, the two statements are also elaborations of the two letters,
`d' and `m'.
This interpretation is not mine, and came to me in an interesting
way. The she'r in question is widely read in India and Pakistan as:
AsAyeSH-e du-gItI, tafsIr-e in do-harf-ast:
bA dUstan `talattuf'; bA duSHmanan `mudArA'.
Back in the 60's, my father was talking to the then Iranian ambassador
to Pakistan at some function, and recited the she'r in its Subcontinental
version. The ambassador immediately corrected him, and explained the
delicate point I described above. To me, it is very interesting that
Hafez --- who was a follower of the sabk-e irAqI, and thus not overly
given to double-entendres and such --- should embed such a subtle allusion
in his she'r. Of course, it is also possible that he never intended this
at all, and it is a later interpretation.
Over the last several years, as I have had the opportunity to read
classical Farsi poets in Iranian printings, I have been amazed at the
differences between these (usually well-researched) versions and the
readings popular in the Subcontinent. Ghalib was right to regard most
Indian `authorities' on Farsi with skepticism, though he went too far
in this regard.
With apologies for the rambling free-assiciation,
Ali Minai
------------------------------------------------------------------------
``na ibitidA ki KHabar haE, na intihA ma'lUm'';
rahA ye vehm ke ham haEN, so voh bhi kyA ma'lUm?! Fani
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Ali Minai
Parul Trivedi
> > >> >
> > >> >yeh sukoot-e-naaz, yeh dil kii rago.n ka TooTna
> > >> >khaamoshi mei.n shikast-e-saaz kii baatei.n karo
> ...
> > >> The second line of the she'r should be:
> > >> KHAmuSHI mEN kuCHh SHikast-E sAz kI bAtEN karO
>
> I am uncomfortable with the notion that a she'r can have only one
> interpretation.
>
Jamil Shaib: I am in full agreement with you and to prove it here is my
interpretation of the Sher :-)
The poet in the first line is telling us about a certain situation that he finds
himself in. ie. with his beloved who is silent and his heart is breaking. What
has cause this situation is not mentioned but is left to the reader to imagine it.
But, one thing is clear that whatever it is it has caused deep sorrow as it is
manifested in her silence and the breaking of his heart
In the second line the poet tells us what we should do ( kind of advise/suggestion
in given) in this type of situation ie. In this quiteness talk about the broken
harp! Why a broken harp (or a musical instrument)? Because at one point in time
this was capable of making the most melodious sound and now it is not. (Ofcourse
the comparison with heart and harp, the strings of the instrument and and 'rag',
silence and the melody of the musical instrument---the language that makes it
poetry-should not be forgotten).
So what does this mean?
To me it says that if a time comes in your life (due to a sorrowfull incident)
that you find that your heart is breaking with grief and your beloved has become
speechless ( silent) then don't get wraped up in your own sorrow but think about
other people that may have suffered a worse fate. Put things in perspective. It
will help you overcome your sorrow.
BTW, Ali Minai shaib, aap ke aane se is mehafil ke ronuuk kuch aur bhad gaii hia!
Thanks for all your postings.
Amit
ahm...@noka.ub.bw
ami...@holmes.ececs.uc.edu (Ali Minai) wrote:
> In article <7f2dff$do9$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, <ahm...@noka.ub.bw> wrote:
> >
> >za shaikh-e-shehr jaan burdam ba tazweer-e-musalmaani.
> >madaara gar ba een kaafar na-mee kardam cheh mee kardam.
> > [I saved myself from the city's shaikh (religous leader) by using this
> >lie of being a (good) Muslim. If I had not depended on this kaafir
> >(deception), what could have I done?]
>
> but `mudArA', which means `caution', `compromise', or `temporization'.
> Thus, the `kAfar' actually refers to the `SHEKH', and the line means:
> ``What could I do but deal cautiously with this infidel (the SHEKH-e
SHehr)?''.
Ali Minai Sahib, thanks for the correction. The she'r makes more sense the
way you have quoted it. I had tried it with mudaawa, madaar agar, and so on;
and nothing seemed entirely satisfactory.
I read this she'r in the collection ('Ghubaar-e-khaatir') of letters written
by Abul Kalam Azad when he was in detention in 1940's. He quotes another
she'r and a half from this ghazal by Yagmaa-e-Jandaqi (?). The lines are as
follows:
Ghalat guftee "cheraa sajjaada-e-taqwa giroo kardee?"
ba zuhd aalooda boodam, gar na-mee kardam cheh mee kardam!
[Tum ne ghalat kahaa keh taqwa kaa sajjaada (prayer mat) kion girvee rakha
hai. Main zuhd se aalooda tha (I was polluted with piety), agar na kartaa to
kia kartaa!]
Za saaghir gar dimaaghe tar na-mee kardam, cheh mee kardam!
[Agar saaghir se main dimaagh tar nahin karta to kia karta?]
Unfortunately the Maulana does not quote the other line of this she'r. If
you know that line or any other she'r from this ghazal, I would appreciate it
if you would post it.
> This is the same word as in Hafez' famous she'r:
>
> AsAyeSH-e du-gItI, tafsIr-e in do-harf-ast:
> bA dUstan `muruvvat'; bA duSHmanan `mudArA'.
>
> (Happiness in both worlds is the elaboration of these two statements:
> With friends, magnanimity; with enemies, caution.)
>
...
> This interpretation is not mine, and came to me in an interesting
> way. The she'r in question is widely read in India and Pakistan as:
>
> AsAyeSH-e du-gItI, tafsIr-e in do-harf-ast:
> bA dUstan `talattuf'; bA duSHmanan `mudArA'.
>
My copy of Diwan-e-Hafez has it with 'talattuf', but then it was printed in
Pakistan.
Jamil
Jay Shergill
I would just like to thank all of you, who took time not only to
explain the she'r, but added quite a bit to it in related aspects.
with regards,
Jay
Ali Minai
>In article <7f38mc$t51$1...@news.ececs.uc.edu>,
>
>I read this she'r in the collection ('Ghubaar-e-khaatir') of letters written
>by Abul Kalam Azad when he was in detention in 1940's. He quotes another
>she'r and a half from this ghazal by Yagmaa-e-Jandaqi (?). The lines are as
>follows:
>
>Ghalat guftee "cheraa sajjaada-e-taqwa giroo kardee?"
>ba zuhd aalooda boodam, gar na-mee kardam cheh mee kardam!
>
> [Tum ne ghalat kahaa keh taqwa kaa sajjaada (prayer mat) kion girvee rakha
>hai. Main zuhd se aalooda tha (I was polluted with piety), agar na kartaa to
>kia kartaa!]
>
>Za saaghir gar dimaaghe tar na-mee kardam, cheh mee kardam!
>
> [Agar saaghir se main dimaagh tar nahin karta to kia karta?]
>
>Unfortunately the Maulana does not quote the other line of this she'r. If
>you know that line or any other she'r from this ghazal, I would appreciate it
>if you would post it.
Happy to oblige.
The full matla' is:
bahAr ar bAde dar sAGHar nemI-kardam, CHe mI-kardam?
ze-sAGHar gar dimAGHI tar nemI-kardam, CHe mI-kardam?
[In Spring, how could I not pour wine into the cup?
And how could I not then drink from it to refresh my spirit?]
(This is not a literal translation, but a very poor attempt to
capture the meaning. The eloquence of the radIf in this ghazal
is beyond translation.)
My information comes from my copy of `GHubAr-e KHAtir',
edited by the inimitable Malik Ram. His notes at the end of the book
are astonishingly informative --- surpassed only the Maulana Azad's
own glorious prose. As Hasrat Mohani said:
jab se dEkhI abul-kalAm ki nasr
nazm-e hasrat meN bhI mazA na rahA
BTW, while Maulana Azad indeed quoted the ``GHalat guftI....'' she'r
as given above, Malik Ram notes that the correct she'r from YaGHmA's
dIvan is:
CHerA, gUyand, dar KHum KHirqei-e sUfI forU kardI?
be-zuhd AlUde bUdam, gar nemI-kardam, CHe mI-kardam?
[They ask, ``Why did you lower the sufi's habit into the bowl (of wine)?''
(I reply:) I was sullied with piety, what else could I do?]
This version has the advantage of connecting the two lines better than
the version quoted by Azad, since it implies that the habit is dipped
into the wine-cup to wash it of its piety. In Azad's version, the
connection between being sullied by piety and the first line is very
tenuous. Also, in Farsi, `forU-kardan' has both the meaning of `lowering'
and `debasing',and the poet is playing on this ambiguity. The questioner
asked: ``Why do you debase your sufi heritage by drinking?'' (essentially
``apnI izzat kO kyUN DubOtE hO?''), using the `KHirqe' as a symbol of
honor and piety, and `forU-kardan' as a metaphor for debasement.
The poet, pretending not to understand, answers in the most literal
sense of `KHirqe' and `forU-kardan', and says, ``kyA karUN? KHirqa
zuhd se nA-pAk ho gayA thA, use dhOnA zurUrI thA''. And, of course,
this apparently literal, simple-minded reply carries a world of profundity
in it!
Maulana Azad used Urdu, Farsi and Arabic ash'ar very copiously in his
writing --- a testament to his incredible learning and amazing memory.
However, it should be remembered that GHubAr-e KHAtir was written while
he was in prison, without access to his books. Every she'r he quotes is
from memory, and when his memory was unclear, he often filled in the
blanks in the most reasonable way. Thus, many ash'ar in GHubar-e KHAtir
are quoted with slight differences from the original. Malik Ram's notes
often supply the correction. In cases where the Maulana only quotes one
line, the notes often provide the other. In most cases, the notes also
give the poet's name. They are, indeed, a very useful addition to the
book.
yaGHmA-e jandaGHI was a 19th century poet who died in 1859 (source:
Farsi Adab ki Mukhtasar Tarin Tarikh).
Ali Minai
----------------------------------------------------------------------
uTh ke KHurSHId ka sAmAn-e safar tAza karEN.
nafas-E sOKHta-E SHAm-o sahar tAza karEN. Iqbal
----------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Ali Minai
ahm...@noka.ub.bw
ami...@holmes.ececs.uc.edu (Ali Minai) wrote:
...
> The full matla' is:
>
> bahAr ar bAde dar sAGHar nemI-kardam, CHe mI-kardam?
> ze-sAGHar gar dimAGHI tar nemI-kardam, CHe mI-kardam?
>
> [In Spring, how could I not pour wine into the cup?
> And how could I not then drink from it to refresh my spirit?]
>
> (This is not a literal translation, but a very poor attempt to
> capture the meaning. The eloquence of the radIf in this ghazal
> is beyond translation.)
> Ali Minai
Ali Minai Sahib:
Is the first line correct the way you have quoted it? Should it be 'az'
(from, by) rather than ar (if). If the first line has az and no ar, the
meaning becomes: "I did not bring spring to the cup by (pouring) wine; (I
lament:) what was it that I used to do."
If a correction needs to be made to the line you have quoted, I would
appreciate seeing it. Thanks.
Jamil
Ali Minai
>In article <7f8pfc$6h$1...@news.ececs.uc.edu>,
> ami...@holmes.ececs.uc.edu (Ali Minai) wrote:
>...
>> The full matla' is:
>>
>> bahAr ar bAde dar sAGHar nemI-kardam, CHe mI-kardam?
>> ze-sAGHar gar dimAGHI tar nemI-kardam, CHe mI-kardam?
>>
>> [In Spring, how could I not pour wine into the cup?
>> And how could I not then drink from it to refresh my spirit?]
>>
>
>Is the first line correct the way you have quoted it? Should it be 'az'
>(from, by) rather than ar (if). If the first line has az and no ar, the
>meaning becomes: "I did not bring spring to the cup by (pouring) wine; (I
>lament:) what was it that I used to do."
>
>If a correction needs to be made to the line you have quoted, I would
>appreciate seeing it. Thanks.
I do not believe any correction is needed; `ar' is correct. Changing
that to `az' would, IMO, disrupt the logical connection between the
two lines. Also, I'm not sure if `bahAr kardan' is proper Farsi idiom;
`dar sAGHar kardan' certainly is.
Ali
--
Ali Minai