===
0276,
2
===

 

{276,2}

;xvurshiid-e .sub;h nikle hai is nuur se kih tuu
shabnam girah me;N rakhtii hai yih chashm-e tar kih ham

1) has the sun of dawn emerged with this/such light, or [have] you?
2) does the dew keep {this/such a} wet eye in its purse, or [do] we?

 

Notes:

girah : 'A knot; knob; node; a joint, knuckle; an articulation; a division (one-sixteenth) of a gaz or yard, three finger-breadths; a purse'. (Platts p.906)

S. R. Faruqi:

In this verse too, the 'seating' of the words is such that a number of meanings are created. The freshness of theme shown In the opening-verse [{276,1}] (that he has made the rose too-- that is, the beloved-- liver-lacerated) doesn't exist here, but the freshness of the meaning is fine.

In the first line: (1) Rising with such light, is this you (the beloved), or the sun? (2) As if the sun rises with such light as this, the way you (the beloved) rise! (3) If we take nikalnaa to mean 'to become unveiled', then the aspect also emerges that it's possible that the sun's light might be brighter than yours, but when both become unveiled then your light seems to be brighter than the sun's.

In the second line: (1) If we take 'this' to mean 'such a', then the meaning becomes that the way a wet eye is in our possession, then in the same way, where is the wet eye in the possession of the dew? (2) If we take 'this' as adjectival, then the meaning becomes that a wet eye like this (that is, my wet eye)-- where is it, in the possession of the dew! (3) By girah me;N rakhnaa can also be meant that we keep our wet eye in our 'bag'-- that is, keep it hidden.

For the meaning of se as 'with', see {111,3}. In the verse the 'commonality' [muraa((at ul-na:ziir] is very beautiful, and has many twists and turns: (1) ;xvurshiid , nuur , shabnam ; (2) .sub;h , nuur , shabnam , tar ; (3) ;xvurshiid , nikle , tuu ; (4) nuur , chashm .

This verse is proof that even if there's no theme, 'meaning-creation' can take place.

[See also {328,6}.]

FWP:

SETS == KYA; PARALLELISM
MOTIFS
NAMES
TERMS == INSHA'IYAH; 'MEANING-CREATION'; WORDPLAY

SRF quite rightly reads the verse with an implied, but colloquially omitted, kyaa at the beginning of each line.

This verse indeed seems to have no real theme, as SRF observes. But something else about it bothers me more. I can't help but mentally link the round, red, bright sun of dawn in the first line, to the round, red (with bloody tears), bright (with fiery tears) eyeball in the second line. And in that case, why in the world would the 'dew' have or maintain such an eye? Moreover, why would the dew have a 'purse' (with or without an eyeball in it) in the first place? But of course SRF doesn't go in this direction, he emphasizes the insha'iyah structure of the lines (and their parallelism), and above all the extensive network of wordplay. Still, I just don't care much for the verse.