=== |
![]() |
maaraa pa;Re hai uns hii karne me;N varnah miir
hai duur gard-e vaadii-e va;hshat-shikaar-e ((ishq
1) he lies stricken/killed in showing/doing only/emphatically 'affection'-- otherwise, Mir
2a) it's far off, the wandering/dust/fortune of the valley of the wildness-hunting of passion
2b) it's far off, the wandering/dust/fortune of the valley-of-wildness-hunting of passion
uns : 'Sociableness; companionableness; familiarity, friendliness, friendship, love, affection; society, companionship, fellowship; cheerfulness'. (Platts p.92)
varnah : '(contrac. of va agar nah ), conj. And if not, otherwise, or else'. (Platts p.1189)
gard : 'Going round, revolving; traversing, travelling or wandering over, or through, or in ... ; —s.f. Dust; —the globe; —fortune'. (Platts p.903)
va;hshat : 'A desert, solitude, dreary place; —loneliness, solitariness, dreariness; —sadness, grief, care; —wildness, fierceness, ferocity, savageness; barbarity, barbarism; —timidity, fear, fright, dread, terror, horror; —distraction, madness'. (Platts p.1183)
FWP:
SETS == IZAFAT; VARNAH
MOTIFS
NAMES
TERMSSince multiple izafats must be interpreted in pairs, we have a choice of two possible pairings: 'the (A of B) of C', the 'valley-of-wildness-hunting of passion' (2b); or 'the A of (B of C)', the 'valley of the wildness-hunting-of-passion' (2a). I've put my own favorite reading first in the translation, but both are certainly possible. Technically, permutations with gard-e could also be included in a set of their own, but in this context I don't think that would add anything of interest. Not all izafats are poetically potentiated in every verse, even if their grammar would permit such elaborations.
The excellent ambiguousness of varnah is also in play here. All we can be sure of is that it always sets up an alternative, sometimes contrafactually and sometimes not. But what in the first line is being juxtaposed to what in the second, and how exactly? Here are some possibilities:
=The lover was struck down in the early stages of passion-- this was unexpected, since later stages are usually the dangerous ones.
=The lover was struck down in the early stages of passion, poor man, before he even had a chance to reach the later stages.
=He was struck down, poor affectionate man, despite his prudence in keeping far away from the dangerous valley of madness and passion.
=He was struck down by mere (?) 'affection', whereas most lovers are destined to be struck down in the mad wanderings of passion.
And of course, what exactly is 'affection'? There may be nothing 'mere' about it. It may, to particularly refined lovers, be as deadly as 'passion' is to more commonplace and unimaginative ones.