===
0386,
1
===

 

{386,1}

achchhii lage hai tujh bin gul-gasht-e baa;G kis ko
.su;hbat rakhe gulo;N se itnaa dimaa;G kis ko

1) a flower-stroll in the garden-- without you, to whom does it seem good?
2) that one would keep company with roses-- who has enough of a mind/'nose' for it?

 

Notes:

gul-gasht : 'Walking in a garden; an evening walk; recreation; a pleasant place for walking or recreation (esp. one blooming with roses and other flowers)'. (Platts p.911)

S. R. Faruqi:

This verse is commonplace; it's been included in order to create the shape/aspect [.suurat] of a ghazal. Ghalib said it much better:

G{27,4}.

But Ghalib in his verse didn't use the word dimaa;G as excellently as in Mir's verse. By mentioning gul , Mir has also included the aspect of dimaa;G as meaning 'nose'. A detailed discussion of both these verses is in shi((r ;Gair-shi((r aur na;sr . And indeed, there's certainly the fact that Ghalib basically adopted one of Mir's lines from the first divan [{468,3}]:

hame;N to baa;G kii takliif se mu((aaf rakho
kih sair-o-gasht nahii;N rasm ahl-e maatam kii

[consider us excused from the bother of the garden
for strolls and tours are not the custom of the people of mourning]

And indeed, Nasikh has made the theme entirely new, and has composed a peerless verse:

kyaa shab-e mah-taab me;N be-yaar jaa))uu;N baa;G ko
saare patto;N ko banaa detii hai ;xanjar chaandnii

[as if, on a moonlit night, I would go to the garden without the beloved!
the moonlight makes all the leaves into daggers]

See:

{693,1}.

FWP:

SETS
MOTIFS
NAMES
TERMS

Note for grammar fans: In the second line, rakhe is a future subjunctive ('that one would keep company...'). In the first line, lage might look the same, but t's not-- lage hai is an archaic form of (here) lagtii hai . And lage hai can't be read as present perfect, because here that would be lagii hai .