The verse is another of those limit cases of ambiguity; it's like the previous verse 213,1 , only even more so. Its elements are so systematically multivalent that it will make sense to look at them one by one: ='Until where/when' establishes the line as markedly ; it can be read either as a genuine question or as a rhetorical question or exclamation-- either an affirmative one that expresses approval, or a negative one that expresses disgust. (This is a variant of the 'kya effect'.) ='Awareness' is addressed, but it's not clear whether this personified entity has, or should have, any power or responsibility for action; perhaps the speaker is simply meditating, talking to his own mind and pointing out to it certain general truths. =The 'color/mood of spectacle' could be either something felt by the beholder, or else something inherent in the spectacle itself; and the many possible meanings of (see the definition above) add to the complexities. =Then, can mean either 'to lose' or 'to bestow' (see the definition above). Although the verb is Persian, both meanings are obviously present in Urdu as well: the former is attested by Bekhud Mohani's idiomatic sense (of losing the color in one's face) and the latter by all the uses of in the sense of something given or bestowed. Since the agent who is doing the losing or bestowing is not at all clear, the possibilities can hardly help but be manifold, and will inevitably include direct opposites of each other. =The 'having-become-open eye', and the sense of as 'revolved, tumbled down', raises the possibility of a decline in state as well. So the verse juxtaposes two possible states: what might be 'seen' in some (mystical) sense by the unopened eye; as compared to what might be seen by the eye after it has opened. Moreover, contains, in a brilliant bit of wordplay, the word , meaning either 'eye' or 'sight'. =The 'embrace of leave-taking' is a moment of maximum intimacy and closeness-- and one that directly precedes and initiates the moment of separation and increasing distance. This 'embrace' also of course makes a rounded shape, like an eye. In the context of the verse, is the 'embrace of leave-taking' a benefit (because it heralds the coming of a better state), or a loss (because something cherished will depart)? And is the opened eye's 'embrace of leave-taking' brought on by the brevity of the time available for sight (as when the bud opens and at once becomes an imminently-doomed rose), or by a superior new insight (the eye no longer chooses, or is able, to see its previous illusions)? For more on the rich possibilities of the 'embrace of leave-taking', see 57,6 . =Finally of course the glory/appearance-- is it the entity that's doing the departing? Or is it the entity that's doing the embracing? Either is grammatically possible. And does the term refer to the 'appearance, manifestation' of the physical world with all its cherished loveliness, or to the ineffable 'glory, radiance' of the Divine realm? In short, since in the first line it's not even clear whether the color/mood of spectacle is being 'lost' or 'bestowed', and since either possibility could be read in such various tones, with various views of the 'opened' or 'closed' eye, and the nature of who or what is giving and receiving the 'embrace of departure', and to what effect, I don't see how we can escape the conclusion that Ghalib has arranged this verse as a do-it-yourself 'meaning-generator', to give a workout to our minds and imaginations. graphics/openeye.jpg