=== |
![]() |
ḳharāb aḥvāl kuchh baktā phire hai dair-o-kaʿbe meñ
suḳhan kyā muʿtabar hai mīr se vāhī tabāhī kā
1a) he wanders around babbling something about 'wretched/ruined', in temple and Ka'bah
1b) he wanders around wretched/ruined, babbling something, in temple and Ka'bah
2) how is the muttering of nonsense by Mir [to be] esteemed as speech/poetry?!
ḳharāb aḥvāl : 'Ruined, desolated; broken down (in circumstances), wretched, distressed'. (Platts p.487)
muʿtabar : 'Held in high estimation or regard, esteemed, honoured, revered; —respectable, creditable, reputable; worthy of confidence, trustworthy, confidential, relied on; credible; true; authentic'. (Platts p.1047)
vāhī tabāhī baknā : 'To talk nonsense; —to use foul language'. (Platts p.1178)
vāhī tabāhī phirnā: 'To wander about'. (Platts p.1178)
FWP:
SETS == KYA; MIDPOINTS: POETRY
MOTIFS == MADNESS; RELIGIONS
NAMES == KA'BAH
TERMSThe clever structure of the first line means that '[in a] wretched/ruined state' [ḳharāb aḥvāl] is a 'midpoint' expression. It could be (1a) a description of what Mir is babbling; since he apparently babbles it everywhere, it could apply to the 'temple' or 'Ka'bah' in which he finds himself, or to himself, or to all lovers, or to the age, or to all humans. Or else it could be (1b) simply the speaker's description of Mir's own wretched or ruined condition, as he wanders around babbling something or other.
Then the second line, which we're strongly invited to read as a rhetorical question, could also be a real question: is it in fact possible for people to admire a poetry that emerges out of madness? Or perhaps the speaker is a jealous, frustrated rival poet, trying to persuade people that they shouldn't value Mir's poetry as much as they do-- so that the second line is an exclamation of indignant denial ('As if his mad mutterings could have any worth!'). Or of course, thanks to the unconstrained powers of kyā , the second line could even be an exclamation of admiration ('How greatly people esteem the poetry that emerges from such so-called babbling!').
Is it significant that the (mystically?) mad poet seems to haunt Hindu and Muslim religious establishments, or does it simply mean he wanders through a very wide and diverse range of places? This too is left for us to decide.