S. R. Faruqi:

The wordplay between 'assembly' and 'flowing gathering' is obvious. Ill-gotten gains are called mataa((-e ravaa;N . In this regard 'flowing gathering' can also be imagined to suggest that this gathering has no trustworthiness. The meaning of majlis can also be 'a place to sit', and in this regard majlis-e ravaa;N is an excellent example of a paradox. Then there's the enjoyableness that it's a majma(( , but nevertheless it's of 'little leisure'. An 'assembly' takes place when people would be assembled, and obviously that can only be when people would have the leisure to 'assemble'. That 'assembly' that would have no leisure, seems rather to be a crowd/rush.

This verse is also an excellent example of 'tumult-arousingness'. The poet himself seems to be outside the scene that he is mentioning. A 'tumult-arousing' verse is usually most successful when the individuality of the poet-- that is, the speaker-- would be veiled. He would be expressing an opinion, and in his expression there would be an uncommon tumult and power ('passion' [English word]).

The theme of a 'flowing gathering', Rasikh Azimabadi too has versified well:

sham((-e sa;har hai;N ham tum kyaa buud-o-baash yaa;N kii
raushan hai be-baqaa))ii is majlis-e ravaa;N kii

we and you are 'candles of dawn'-- what duration/livability is there here?
it is illumined-- the instability of this 'flowing gathering'

Rasikh's verse too is an example of 'tumult-arousingness'. The affinity of 'candle of dawn' and 'radiance' is also excellent.

[See also {266,2}.]

FWP:

SETS == EXCLAMATION; IDIOMS; INEXPRESSIBILITY
MOTIFS == GATHERINGS
NAMES
TERMS == INSHA'IYAH; PARADOX; TUMULT-AROUSING; WORDPLAY

Both lines of this superb verse are 'insha'iyah' [inshaa))iyah] to an extreme degree: not only do they not purport to give information in a factual (that is, a ;xabariyah ) way, but they both present themselves as despairing at the very thought of trying to convey such information. The 'inexpressibility trope' is a delight in itself. Moreover, they both use wonderfully idiomatic expressions of frustration to express their despair ('don't ask!' 'what can I say?'); as usual, in my translation I've gone for literalness rather than colloquial charm.

Is it 'that' gathering (as SRF would prefer, because of his concept of 'tumult-arousingness') or 'this' gathering? Of course, we can't tell. When in doubt, for many reasons I usually go for 'that'. In the present verse, I also find 'this' appealing, because the cri de coeur of a person who's helplessly trapped in the very doom he's describing has a poignancy that's more moving than the detached comment of an observer.