=== |
![]() |
;xa:t likh ke ko))ii saadah nah us ko maluul ho
ham to ho;N bad-gumaan jo qaa.sid rasuul ho
1a) having written a blank letter to her, let no one be dispirited/dejected
1b) having written a letter to her, let no guileless/simple person be dispirited/dejected
1c) having written a candid/open letter to her, would anyone not
be dispirited/dejected?
2a) we would be suspicious, even if the Messenger would be a prophet
2b)
we would be suspicious, if the Messenger would be the bearer of an oral message
saadah : 'Plain, unadorned; white; pure, unmixed, simple; unseasoned; smooth; beardless; without writing or impression, blank (as paper, &c.); unstamped (paper); candid, sincere, artless, guileless, open, frank'. (Platts p.623)
maluul : 'Fatigued, tired, weary; languid; sick, indisposed; vexed; affected; grieved; sad, dejected, melancholy, out of spirits'. (Platts p.1066)
qaa.sid : 'A messenger, courier, an express, a postman, letter-carrier'. (Platts p.786)
rasuul : 'One who has a message, a messenger; an apostle, the apostle Mohammad'. (Platts p.593)
FWP:
SETS == A,B; GENERATORS; MIDPOINTS
MOTIFS == WRITING
NAMES == MESSENGER
TERMS == ENTANGLEMENTThe first line is about an unknown 'someone' who who writes a (possibly blank) letter to the beloved and may perhaps be 'guileless, simple' and/or 'dispirited, dejected'. Since saadah is a 'midpoint' adjective, it could modify either the letter ('blank', or else 'clear, candid'; see the definition above), or else the letter-writer ('guileless, sincere'). The future subjunctive verb ho can be read as 'would, might, should'; it can thus express wishes, hopes, fears, or neutral possibilities; so here too there are many permutations possible. As SRF notes, each reading could be taken as either a statement or a question, which further multiplies the permutations.
The second line of this 'A,B' verse is about how 'we' (the speaker himself, or lovers in general) behave. On one reading, the speaker is so paranoid that he would be suspicious of the Messenger even if he were a divine emissary-- a prophet (or even 'the' Prophet). On another reading, he would be suspicious of the Messenger if he bore, in addition to a written letter, an oral message as well-- since rasuul can, as SRF notes, imply the bearing of an oral message.
By now, we readers are surrounded by a cloud of possible permutations. I won't seek to ring the changes. Instead, by way of illustration I'll just paraphrase in clearer detail the logic of the three basic possibilities outlined by SRF.
For SRF's first reading of the first line (1a), an expanded paraphrase can be: 'No one should be sorry about sending her a blank letter-- such prudence or paranoia is just normal behavior, for we lovers are always suspicious of the Messenger'. For SRF's second reading (1b), a similar paraphrase can be: 'No simple, sincere person should be sorry about sending her a letter-- the risk is worth running, for we lovers are always irrationally suspicious of the Messenger, whether or not there's any cause'. For his third reading (1c), a paraphrase can be: 'How could anybody who sends her a candid, open letter not be unhappy afterwards? We lovers are always suspicious of the Messenger!'
Are the lovers' suspicions perhaps well-grounded (because the Messenger is gossipy or unreliable, or has been bribed by some Rival, or is likely himself to fall in love with the beloved), or are their suspicions irrational and paranoid (because they are born of the mad lovers' wild, disproportionate emotions)? As so often, it's left up to us to decide.