=== |
![]() |
āñkheñ khulīñ to dekhā jo kuchh nah dekhnā thā
ḳhvāb-e ʿadam se ham ko kāhe ke tīñ jagāyā
1a) when our eyes opened, then we saw whatever should not have been seen
1b) when our eyes opened, then whatever we saw, should not have been seen
2) from the 'sleep/dream of nonexistence', why did [someone] awaken us?
ʿadam : 'Non-possession, lack, want; non-existence, nonentity; nothing; annihilation'. (Platts p.759)
kāhe : 'The inflec. base of the Braj. pron. kahā (=H. kyā ), 'what?' — kāhe-se , 'with what?' 'from what cause?' 'wherefore?' — kāhe kā , 'of what' (thing or material?): — kāhe-ko , 'for what?' 'why?' 'wherefore?' — kāhe-liye , or kāhe-vāste (for kāhe-ke liye , &c.), 'why?' 'for what reason or purpose?' 'on what ground?' &c.'. (Platts p.808)
taʾīñ : 'postpn. (governing gen. with -ke ), To, up to: (- ke taʾīñ = ko ; e.g. us ke taʾīñ = us ko '. (Platts p.353)
FWP:
SETS == MIDPOINTS
MOTIFS == DREAMS; LIFE/DEATH
NAMES
TERMSIn what sense are we to take nah dekhnā thā ? Does it refer to something that the speaker had been forbidden to see, by the decree of God or fate? Something that he ought not to have looked at, for some personal reasons of distaste or aversion? Something that normally would be invisible, but somehow he caught an impossible glimpse? Moreover, the 'midpoint' position of jo kuchh yields two possible readings, each with subtly different implications, as shown above in the translation. Needless to say, we're left to decide all this for ourselves.
Who woke the speaker up from the ḳhvāb-e ʿadam , and to whom is he complaining? The verse gives not the smallest hint; it's left up to us readers to decide who the agent and the addressee might be.
Note for grammar fans: Interlocking archaisms here. The tīñ is a form of taʾīñ , contracted in both spelling and pronunciation into one long syllable for metrical convenience. Then, ke taʾīñ is more or less equivalent to ko . So we're left with kāhe ko , which is roughly the same as kyūñ .