What a remarkable exaggeration , such that within the scope of the exaggeration he's shown an attractive vision too! But by the rose becoming a robe for the stature of the cypress is meant not that one rose would grow so tall that it would become the cypress's robe, but rather the author's intention is that the branches of the rose should so flourish that they would become wrapped around the cypress and cause it to wear a robe of flowers. And in this exaggeration there's the excellence that nothing impossible is necessary. And if by 'rose' one rose would be intended, then the exaggeration moves toward impossibility, and this is a fault in exaggeration, and this fault has always been described by writers as a fault, but the poets of Persia and Hind perhaps consider it a verbal device , and don't avoid it. Everybody has been heard committing this fault. The late author himself takes no care against speaking of impossibilities []; for example, we've seen this verse: 120,5 . That is, she's so blood-shedding that her horse swims in a river of blood. It's only impossible exaggeration. [Further discussion, with examples from Vazir, Nasikh, and Momin.] (219-21) == Nazm page 219 ; Nazm page 220 ; Nazm page 221

He says, 'Oh Ghalib, in the spring season one ought to consider it a shortfall of growth and flourishing, if the rose vines don't grow and spread and cause the cypress to wear a robe of flowers'. The extreme excellence of the thought and of the placing of the words is worthy of praise. (278)

Oh Ghalib, if the branches of the roses don't grow and embrace the cypress and cause it to wear a colorful robe of flowers, then consider that there's a shortfall of growth and flourishing. That is, in growth and flourishing the springtime state is that from the abundance of roses the cypress would become rose-attired. (386)