===
0006,
3
===

 

{6,3}

zamaane ne mujh jur((ah-kash ko nadaan
kiyaa ;xaak-o-;xisht-e sar-e ;xum kiyaa

1) the age/time made me, a guzzler, unaware,
2) into dust-- and made me the brick of the mouth of the cask/still

 

Notes:

;xum : 'A large vessel or jar; an alembic, a still'. (Platts p.493)

*Platts Dictionary Online*

S. R. Faruqi:

In this verse too, Mir's special dignity glimmers. The meaning of jur((ah-kash is a gulper-down, or a drinker of every drop. The age turns him into dust, but even so, in him the zeal for wine-drinking is such that his dust becomes the brick that is used to cover the cask of wine. The alliteration of ;xaak ;xisht ;xum is also worth noting. There's no cause for regret in becoming dust, but rather a kind of stubborn pride. In the verse there's also a sarcastic aspect, that as long as I was alive, I used to get wine only by the drop; but when I became dust, then I was seated atop a cask. In this another point too is that since the brick does the work of covering the cask, it follows that I love wine so much that even after death I am covering the cask, so that the wine wouldn't be wasted. The style of the verse is outwardly regretful, but behind the veil the poet's pride is showing.

['Umar] Khayyam has often used this kind of theme, but in Khayyam the principle aspect is always that man has to die and rot away into dust. His style is sorrowful, didactic, and dramatic. His tone is dignified, but there's no sarcasm directed at himself, or at the age. Rather, there is silent mourning at man's destiny. And the truth is that Mir has not used this theme (that is, to die and become dust and then become something useful for wine-drinking) better than Khayyam has. But the thing in which Mir has outdone Khayyam is is his sarcastic style and depth. Khayyam has more didacticism....

FWP:

WINE verses: {6,3}

One more point: was it the age that was 'unaware', or was it the speaker? The adverb could go either way. If the age was unaware, then perhaps if it had been paying more attention it wouldn't have provided the speaker with such a congenial destiny (since the age, fortune, destiny is so often basically inimical). If the speaker was unaware, then his obliviousness reflects his utter absorption in wine-drinking, to the exclusion of all worry about his future fate.