0977_05

S. R. Faruqi:

This theme Mir has versified again and again. And his love for this theme once again calls into question the opinion of Askari and Salim Ahmad that Mir lays down his ego before the beloved and the people of the world, that he does not insist on its primacy. Here, the situation is that he doesn't even consent to be slaughtered along with everyone else. Consider this verse:

{226,6}.

Now look at these verses. From the first divan [{591,6}]:

loṭe hai ḳhāk-o-ḳhūn meñ ġhairoñ ke sāth mīr
aise to nīm-kushtah ko un meñ nah sāniye

[Mir writhes in dust and blood with Others
please don't mix in such a half-slain one with them!]

From the second divan [{815,8}]:

rakhnā thā vaqt-e qatl mirā imtiyāz hāʾe
so ḳhāk meñ milāyā mujhe sab meñ sān kar

[she ought to have retained my distinction at the time of murder, alas
thus she put me down into the dust, mixing me in with them all]

From the sixth divan [{1898,7}]:

āge bichhā ke nit̤ʿa ko lāte the teġh-o-t̤asht
karte the yaʿnī ḳhūn to ik imtiyāz se

[having spread out the leather-dropcloth beforehand, they brought the sword and basin
that is, they did the murder with a singular distinction]

From the sixth divan [{1904,5}]:

sān mārā aur kushtoñ meñ mire kushte ko bhī
us kushandah laṛke ne be-imtiyāzī ḳhūb kī

[he killed us among other slain ones-- even my slaughter
that murderous boy did with a fine lack of distinction!]

All these have been discussed with verse

{226,6},

and despite this I felt the present verse to be worthy of inclusion in the intikhab, because in its theme there are some aspects that don't appear in the verses cited above: (1) In her ardor or zeal for slaughter, the beloved makes no distinction among friend, enemy, true lover, and lustful lover. (2) Those people who were 'mixed' with the speaker are undoubtedly his enemies-- as if it was a sufficient proof of their being enemies that they deprived the speaker of the honor of dying alone.

(3) In the present verse, for the slaughter żabḥ karnā has been used, which is more powerful and suggestive. In żabḥ karnā there are images of preparation, pomp and circumstance, the slaughtered one being caused to fall to the ground, a knife being sliced across his throat, and so on, that are not present in qatl karnā , ḳhūn karnā , kushtah karnā . The phrase żabḥ karnā makes the situation more bloody and immediate.

When under the influence of English the 'morality' of passion changed for us, we began to see that same theme of the desire for distinction take, in the work of Hasrat Mohani, this form:

tire sitam se maiñ ḳhvush hūñ kih ġhālibaṅ yūñ hī
mujhe vuh shāmil-e arbāb-e imtiyāz kare

[I am happy with your cruelty, for probably somehow/casually
you would place me among the possessors of distinction]

Just reflect-- on the one hand, to mingle with dust and blood, to become a target for cruelty. On the other hand, by contrast, a poet who remained comparatively protected from the English influence, for example Dagh-- with what informality he has versified the words sān'nā and the idiom hāthoñ ko ḳhūn meñ sān'nā :

chhūṭegī ḥashr tak nah yih mihñdī lagī huʾī
tum hāth mere ḳhūn meñ kyūñ sānte nahīñ

[until Doomsday this henna will not depart, having been applied
why don't you smear your hands in my blood?]

In Dagh's verse there are several kinds of sarcasm, while Hasrat Mohani's verse is entirely flat and without depth. In Mir's present verse both lines are insha'iyah, and in karte kisū ko żabḥ there's a homey informality that brings the verse near to real life.

[See also {435,2}.]

{977,5}

Notes:

S. R. Faruqi:

FWP: