1164_06

S. R. Faruqi:

muñh par dauṛnā = to confront, to oppose

Tears and children share the quality of perversity/obstinacy; thus for tears the simile of a child is used. The classical poets have used this theme very well. Thus Momin has a verse that is extremely superb, although a bit riddling:

deñ pākī dāman kī gavāhī mire āñsū
us yūsuf-e be-dard kā ějāz to dekho

[my tears would bear witness to the purity of the garment-hem
look at the miracle of that pitiless Yusuf!]

It's well known that a single child bore witness to Hazrat Yusuf's honorableness. Here since the speaker is shedding tears, this proves that the beloved is honorable. Because if the beloved had confided herself to the lover, then why would the lover weep? Thus just as the child bore witness to the purity of Hazrat Yusuf, the lover's tear-child bears witness to the purity of the beloved (the pitiless Yusuf). It's clear that the theme has been made so very far removed, and the theme is so lightweight, that when the interpretation of the verse is understood, then it's a case of 'to dig up a mountain-- and bring back a straw' [koh kundan-o-kāh bar āvardan].

In contrast, look at Mir Soz:

kyūñ t̤ifl-e ashk tujh ko āñkhoñ meñ maiñ ne pālā
us par bhī mere muñh par yūñ garm ho ke āyā

[why, oh tear-child, did I bring you up 'in my eyes'?
despite that, you have, like this, so hotly 'come down upon' my face!]

It's probable that Mir used Mir Soz's verse to make his own, and the truth is that Mir Soz's verse is several levels better than Mir's. In Soz's verse, there are wordplays and affinities upon wordplays and affinities. On the basis of them, Soz's verse is a superb example of 'meaning-creation'.

But Mir's verse is worthy of attention because in it the idiom muñh par dauṛnā has been used. I couldn't find this idiom in any dictionary. The form muñh par ānā , meaning 'to confront', is common and widely used, and is present in every dictionary. It's clear that there was no metrical difficulty: āyā and dauṛā are metrically the same. If Mir had wanted to, he could easily have said hamāre muñh pah t̤ifl-e ashk āyā . Thus he used dauṛā deliberately. This idiom ought to find a place in dictionaries. At present, things are such that even in Janab Farid Ahmad Barkati's farhang-e mīr it doesn't appear.

Mir Soz wrote muñh par garm ho ke ānā . Duncan Forbes [in his Urdu dictionary], declaring it to be a separate idiom, gives the meaning as 'to behave insolently toward the reputation/glory of some venerable elder'. This meaning is suitable for Mir Soz's verse, but this idiom itself I haven't found in any other dictionary. It's possible that this too might be a specialized/rare idiom. But it's more probable that Mir Soz used the idiom muñh par ānā , meaning 'to confront', and used the word 'hot' because of its affinity with tears. But keeping in mind the possibility that muñh par garm ho ke ānā might be a specialized/rare idiom, it still ought to be put in dictionaries, on the authority of Mir Soz.

Taking advantage of the affinity between teardrop and child, Nur ul-Ain Vaqif has composed [in Persian] an enjoyable verse:

'That silver-bodied child whom I had 'seated in my eye'--
Like a tear, he slowly, gradually disappeared from view.'

In Mir's verse too, two cases of wordplay are very interesting: t̤ifl / dauṛnā and laṛkā / baṛā dil . But Mir Soz's conversational tone is very pleasing, and it's also very near to everyday life.

[See also {1504,3}.]

{1164,6}

Notes:

S. R. Faruqi:

FWP: