ABOUT : The verse centers on . I've given the full meaning from Platts, to show its range. (It mustn't be confused with expressions; on them see 58,1 .) The literal meaning of is something like 'good', often with overtones of almost simplicity or naivete (for an example of this straightforward use, see 162,9 ). But colloquially, becomes an interjection that vigorously rejects, or expresses lively irritation or vexation about, whatever is being said. (This sarcasm is what Platts is trying to get at in the second part of his definition, though it doesn't emerge very clearly.) Here are some other such uses: 114,4 , 153,1 . I originally translated this colloquial sense as 'what the hell!', which conveyed the slangy, indignant energy better than any other expression I could think of. But the reference to 'hell' made the English phrase sound more radical than does in Urdu. My wonderful ghazal class of spring 2009 thought 'what the hell' was overdone, and after some brainstorming we came up with 'for goodness sake', which has the advantage of retaining the literal sense of the word . They all firmly endorsed the change, so even though I was a bit sulky about it, I've now made it. And I dedicate this choice of wording to the collective will of that excellent and inspiring group of students. (Hi, everybody, wherever you are-- remember our evenings in Kent 522B!) In the first line, is an excellent choice of words, because in addition to its official meaning of 'courage' (see the definition above), it literally means 'liver-possession'. And in ghazal physiology, as we in the audience are expected to know, the liver is the source of fresh blood. A lover without a liver will quickly weep away all his blood in the form of bloody tears, or see it flow out of his wounded heart with no prospect of replenishment. So his doom is imminent-- how could he possibly make any claim of fortitude or endurance? The enjoyable part of this verse is its tone of indignation, or even belligerence. It takes what would normally be a reproach-- the charge that the lover has no fortitude or endurance-- and twists it into an vigorous repudiation. 'What! Who made such a stupid claim as that of having fortitude? Certainly I never did! The very idea! For goodness sake-- as if lovers have any patience/endurance of temperament!' The speaker feels a twofold indignation, in fact. To be suspected of claiming to have patience/endurance or fortitude is an insult, since in his view no true lover would be rash or foolish enough to make such a claim. And it seems from the second line that it's equally insulting for a lover to be suspected of having patience/endurance or fortitude. After all, it's a lover's proper duty to be wild, transgressive, bound for death and destruction, like the Moth -- what an insult to be described in terms appropriate to the Advisor ! The lover's indignation is a delight to behold. graphics/liver.jpg