=== |
![]() |
jhamkā : 'Radiance, lustre, sparkle, glitter, splendour, refulgence'. (Platts p.407)
fānūs : 'A pharos, lighthouse; a lantern; (in Urdu) a glass shade (of a candlestick, &c.)'. (Platts p.776)
dāġh : '(adjectively) branded, cauterized, scarred, wounded, &c.'. (Platts p.501)
FWP:
SETS == KYA
MOTIFS == CANDLE
NAMES
TERMS == GROUND; METER; RHYMEOn the nature of a fānūs , see G{39,1}.
The verse cleverly leaves it ambiguous whether the candle is sulking behind its glass-shade because it is an aspiring beloved (and thus is frustrated by the real beloved's superior radiance), or because it is an aspiring lover (and thus is frustrated by the beloved's refusal to take any notice of its passion).
Isn't it intriguing that there seems to be no objective definition of a 'difficult ground'? Commentators point them out from time to time, but they never explain how the 'difficulty' can be recognized and its degrees distinguished. This seems to be just one more case in which the ahl-e zabāñ connoisseur simply makes an observation of something that is obvious to him. (Historically speaking, in terms of Urdu literary criticism, it's indeed almost always a 'him'.) SRF tells us that the rhyme, ūr , is 'shapeless', and that the refrain is such that it's difficult for there to be a verse in it at all.
I find it easy to believe that ūr se shamʿa is a difficult ground, but I'd still like to know more about the judgment process. As far as I'm aware, poets themselves only rarely identify a particular ground as difficult (though we do have a few literary anecdotes on the subject from tazkirahs); in the case of Ghalib and Mir, SRF observes that they are so masterful that they cause us readers not even to notice the difficulty.
So of course in principle it's possible that they didn't notice any such difficulty themselves, at least in many (or even most?) cases; which would add force to my question. How sure are we, how sure can we be, that what we think are difficult grounds, were actually experienced as such by the poets who chose and used them?
When I asked SRF if he had further thoughts on the nature of difficult grounds, he replied (March 2014):
The matter of difficult grounds is not as subjective as you think. The first point is that if rhymes [qāfiyah] would be difficult or few, then the ground will become difficult, as for example with honā , bonā , khonā , dhonā , sonā -- there won't be many rhymes. Or ġhanī , dhanī , banī , ṭhanī -- with their constraints, there won't be many rhymes. And if the constraint would be greater, as with sāḳhtanī , bāḳhtanī , nāḳhtanī , then the ground will become even more difficult.
If in the refrain there would be words like hī , to , bhī , phir bhī , to sahī , hai to sahī , then the ground will become difficult in itself, because to sustain rhyme with it is a very rebarbative task: marnā hai to sahī , dekhā hai to sahī , or mushkil hī to hai , bismil hī to hai , etc.
If the refrain would be very long, then the ground will usually be considered difficult, as in falak pah bijlī zamīñ pah bārāñ ; or īmāñ sar par , imkāñ sar par ; or ---ne jāte jāte , etc. You can certainly see the difficulty of these grounds.
If the refrain would be entirely unfamiliar, or made up of apparently uncouth words, then the ground will become very difficult, as with: kī makkhī ; meñ sāñp ; hai bichchū . If with these refrains the rhyme would be unfamiliar or a bit far-fetched, then the ground will become even more difficult, as with: kitāb meñ sāñp , sharāb meñ sāñp ; or maḥal kī makkhī , ġhazal kī makkhī , etc.
If in the refrain and the rhyme (or only in the refrain) there would be insha'iyah speech ( kyūñ , kyā , kaisā , kaise , etc.), then the ground will become very difficult, as with āte haiñ kyūñ , jāte haiñ kyūñ , or ṭhaharte kyā kyā , marte kyā kyā , etc.
If the rhyme would be apparently easy, but it would be hard to maintain it with the refrain, then the easy rhyme will provide no particular help, as in: pardah kiyā to thā , jalvah kiyā to thā ; or zanjīr naz̤ar āʾī , lakīr naz̤ar āʾī ; or āsāñ mārā gayā , paimāñ mārā gayā , etc.