S. R. Faruqi:

This verse is very famous, and rightfully so. A particularly large share in spreading this fame also belongs to Hali. In his 'Muqaddamah' he discussed this verse in such a way that even today, a hundred years later, it seems difficult to add to it.

Sa'di has a [Persian] verse,

'Friends forbade me-- why did I give my heart to you?
First you should be asked-- why are you so fine/beautiful?'

Hali has written out Sa'di's verse, then has written Mir's verse (in Mir's first line he has written pūchhiye instead of pūchhte ). After that, Hali says:

In Sa'di's verse is the word ḳhūb , and in Mir's verse is the word pyāre . It's clear that for a beloved to be fine/beautiful is not a necessary thing, but for a beloved to be lovable is necessary. Thus Sa'di's question can be answered, but Mir's question cannot be answered. [muqaddamah-e shiʿr-o-shāʿirī , pp. 144-45]

Obviously, Hali's praise of this point too is such that it cannot be answered. In the discussion of

{483,2},

we have already read Muhammad Husain Azad's saying about a famous source of poetic benefit, 'translation' from another language, that it is 'a difficult art'. Hali's words on this subject in the 'Muqaddamah' are more interesting. Hali writes:

To make a superb translation of a verse from one language, into another language, is no easy thing.... Although the person who excellently translates a verse from another language into a verse in his own language does not demonstrate imaginative/inventive achievement, he gives proof of a different ability that cannot exist in every poet. [muqaddamah-e shiʿr-o-shāʿirī , p. 145]

Hali's view that in translating a verse into a verse there is no imaginative/inventive achievement, is interesting but deserves discussion. The question of what the 'different ability' is that Hali has mentioned, is also interesting. The theory of translation experienced a great revolution in our time, when in 1961 Robert Lowell published his translations (or 'creative translations') in a collection called 'Imitations'. Then in 1969 he published 'creative translations' of Baudelaire's poems. Since that time, the western world has again become aware that a translation too can be an entirely 'creative' and 'imaginative/inventive' act.

Now let's again consider Mir's verse. In accounting for this theme, the central and crucial importance of the word pyāre is something that Mir felt very strongly. Thus fifty or so years later when he again versified this theme, he kept the word pyāre in place, although the verse lacks the 'dramaticness' of the present verse. From the fifth divan [{1760,3}]:

ṭhahre haiñ ham to mujrim ṭuk pyār kar ke tum ko
tum se bhī koʾī pūchhe tum kyūñ huʾe pyāre

[we have been judged culpable just for showing/'doing' love for you
if only someone would ask even/also you, 'Why did you become lovable?!']

In the second divan, Mir has written the theme of the present verse with extreme verbal economy and power of implication:

{775,5}.

Alas, that like many good verses of Mir's, this one too has remained in the 'niche of obscurity'! Otherwise, the construction mihr-afzā , and the implication of the second line, would be a source of pride to the best of the best.

Dagh, profiting from Mir's verses (and possibly also from Hali's comments), has brought out a good verse:

ā hī jātī hai t̤abīʿat lauṭ hī jātā hai dil
kyūñ banā dī hai ḳhudā ne terī ṣūrat pyār kī

[the temperament does come, the heart does return!
why has the Lord made your face of love?]

The expression pyār kī ṣūrat is fine; but in the first line, in comparison to the power of lauṭ hī jātā hai dil , the ā hī jātī hai t̤abīʿat has a displeasing limpness.

[See also {1161,1}.]

FWP:

SETS
MOTIFS
NAMES
TERMS == TRANSLATION

Well, the present verse is all right in its (notably unsubtle) way, but to my mind not very inspiring. I don't care for its overly obvious structure, for the same reason that I'm not fond of Ghalib's

G{230,10}.

But the Mir verse that SRF cites from the second divan simply blows me away. I love it so much that I decided to add it (and then a few other verses from its ghazal) to the website as a main commentarial selection:

{775,5}.

Note for translation fans: Remember that, alas, pyār karnā can't be translated straightforwardly. It doesn't at all mean 'to make love' in the modern English sense. It no doubt has behavioral aspects, but refers not to physical sex, but to something more like flirting or cajoling.