Verse 3x1816ilkaa


G2

1
{although / to such an extent / since} the illusion/suspicion of the slaughtered one was turned-to-blood by the envy/jealousy of faithfulness
2
the wounds of the heart stole/absorbed the 'water' of the murderer's/murderous sword

'From the abundance; sufficiently; very, extremely, excessively; notwithstanding, although'.
'Inasmuch as; extremely, &c. = '.
'Returned; turned; inverted, reversed; converted; perverted; changed; --become; formed'.
'Thinking, imagining, conceiving (esp. a false idea); --opinion, conjecture; imagination, idea, fancy; --suspicion, doubt; scruple, caution; distrust, anxiety, apprehension, fear'.
'To steal, filch, pilfer, rob; to plagiarize; to misappropriate; to suck in or up, to absorb'.
'Water ... ; water or lustre (of a gem, &c.); lustre, sparkle, polish, brightness, beauty; spirit, mettle, blood, breed; character, reputation, honour; chastity, modesty, delicacy, sense of shame'.
'Water; water or lustre (in gems); temper (of steel, &c.); edge or sharpness (of a sword, &c.); sparkle, lustre; splendour; elegance; dignity, honour, character, reputation'.

References
Arshi, Imtiyaz Ali Ghazal# 16
Raza, Kalidas Gupta 151
Nuskhah-e-Hamidiyah 59-60
Asi, Abdul Bari 64
Gyan Chand 95-97
Hamid Ali Khan Open Image

For background see S. R. Faruqi's choices . This verse is NOT one of his choices; I thought it was weirdly interesting and have added it myself. For more on Ghalib's unpublished verses, see the discussion in 4,8x . As Gyan Chand points out, the idea that a sword has 'water' goes back to the Persian (and Urdu) , with meanings that include luster, brilliance, and well-temperedness. But most of the same meanings have come to inhere in too, at least by extension (see the definitions above). This verse assumes that a sword has 'water' in the liquid sense, such that its water can be taken away from it-- and the verse reports to us an incident in which such a water-appropriation occurred. Without the wordplay of and , the verse would be nowhere. For more on wordplay, see 193,2 . But what exactly does it signify that the wounds of the heart 'stole' or 'absorbed' [] the 'water' of the murderer's sword (or the murderous sword)? If it was an act of theft, it would seem to show hostility, or at least possessiveness: the sword thus loses its 'temperedness' or 'virtue', and can't pierce (anyone else) so sharply in the future. If it was an act of absorption, it might show acceptance or even submission, as Gyan Chand points out. The image is so abstract and unusual that there isn't a codified, 'pre-poeticized' way to interpret it. And as usual, Ghalib has cleverly set up the several possibilities of , in order to multiply our interpretive choices. We have at least several basic alternatives: 'Although the slaughtered one was envious/jealous and suspicious, nevertheless the wounds stole/absorbed the water of the murderer's sword'. Or: 'The slaughtered one was so envious/jealous and suspicious that the wounds stole/absorbed the water of the murderer's sword'. Or: 'Since the slaughtered one was envious/jealous and suspicious, the wounds stole/absorbed the water of the murderer's sword'. For more on the complexities of , see 53,4 . Asi makes the excellent point that the verse really has nothing to offer except elaborate and entirely cerebral wordplay. Since the idea of a wound's either 'stealing' or 'absorbing' the 'water' of a sword can't be visualized, it doesn't really resonate. It has no real 'objective correlative' for us to imaginatively explore and enjoy. Thus it feels arbitrary rather than well-grounded. It does certainly show how radically the young Ghalib was exploring the possibilities of sheer wordplay. graphics/sword.jpg