===
1554,
3
===
 

{1554,3}

aage ((aalam ((ain thaa us kaa ab ((ain-e ((aalam hai vuh
us va;hdat se yih ka;srat hai yaa;N meraa sab gyaan gayaa

1) previously the world was exactly/intrinsically his, now he is the eye/sun/best of the world
2) from that Oneness, there's {such a / 'this'} multiplicity/multitude, here, all my wisdom went [away]

 

Notes:

((ain : The eye; sight; source, fount, fountain; udder (of an animal); the choice, the best, the very essence (of a thing), the thing itself; money, cash; gold; the sun;... —adj. Very, exact, precise, real, intrinsic, just:'. (Platts p.767)

 

ka;srat : 'Multitude, plenty, abundance, superfluity, excess, glut; plurality, multiplicity, majority, the major part, the best or greatest part'. (Platts p.817)

*Platts Dictionary Online*

S. R. Faruqi:

The word ((ain has a number of meanings. Among them, the following meanings are helpful to us:

(1) that which would be the source/origin [a.sl] of something; that is, in which that thing's 'thing-ness' would be hidden

(2) jauhar ['A gem, jewel; a pearl; essence, matter, substance, constituent, material part (opp. to accident), absolute or essential property; skill, knowledge, accomplishment, art; excellence, worth, merit, virtue; secret nature; defects, vices', Platts p.399]

(3) the best element or part of something, the way the mind or heart is the best part of the human body

(4) the true/essential [a.sl] substance

(5) some venerable or honored person or existence

(6) the sun, or the sun's rays

(7) the fountainhead

(8) wealth and gold

Now in the light of them, let's consider the verse. Formerly we used to consider that this world, this universe of existence, was the essence of God Most High; that is, God's divinity was in truth the universe. Thus we used to consider the universe to be the bearer of ancient and primal divine qualities, and we used to suspect that the world (that is, the universe) was the Lord himself.

But when we reflected further, we arrived at the conclusion that God's divinity is the source of the world. That is, we realized that (1) the world is created, and God's divinity is its creator; (2) or else we realized that the universe is not the essence of God's divinity, but rather God's divinity is the source of the universe. That is, the universe has no existence in its own right, apart from the wisdom of God's divinity.

In the first [earlier] view, there was oneness upon oneness, because God's divinity was not separate from the universe. But in the second [later] view, the sight of abundance upon abundance of glory/appearance was in truth such a thing as would cause a man to forget all his wisdom, or to fall into stupefaction. He's composed a strange and extraordinary verse. To express such a subtle and rare idea in so few words is itself not less than a miracle.

The word se has two meanings: (1) this abundance is because of that oneness; or (2) where was that oneness, and where is this abundance? [i.e., they are incommensurable].

Hazrat Shah Abd ul-Razzaq Sahib Jhanjhanvi has written in one of his [Persian] essays (in Tanvir Ahmad Alavi's translation), 'Thus this world, before its manifestation, was precisely/perfectly [((ain] God; and after its manifestation it has been precisely/perfectly [((ain] the world'. In this light of this point, the interpretation of the first line has become that as long as this world had not become manifest, that world had become manifest as precisely/perfectly [((ain] the world. In view of the similarity of the words, it wouldn't be strange if this essay of Hazrat Shah Abd ul-Razaaq (which Hazrat Abd ul-Haq Muhaddis Dihlavi had also reproduced in his tazkirah a;xbaar ul-a;Gyaar ) would have passed before Mir's eyes.

A reflecttion of one more essay of Hazrat Abd ul-Razzaq is in a verse of the third divan as well:

{1201,2}.

[See also {1506,7}.]

FWP:

SETS == MIDPOINTS
MOTIFS == [BELOVED IS GOD]
NAMES
TERMS

The multivalent meanings of ((ain make it hard to decide how to translate even SRF's commentary, not to speak of the verse itself.

The idea of a 'multiplicity/multitude' of 'oneness' is excellently paradoxical in itself. It's described as 'that' oneness, which resonates enjoyably with 'this' multiplicity (an idiomatic usage for 'such a').

In the second line, 'here' is a midpoint: it can be read with the phrase before it ('such a multiplicity here') or with the one after it ('for my part, my wisdom left me').