===
1700,
1
===

 

{1700,1}

;haakim shahr-e ;husn ke :zaalim kyuu;N-kih sitam-iijaad nahii;N
;xuun kisuu kaa ko))ii kare vaa;N daad nahii;N faryaad nahii;N

1) the rulers of the city of beauty, the tyrants-- how are they not cruelty-inventors?
2) if anyone would murder anyone, there--there's no justice, there's no complaint!

 

Notes:

daad : 'Statute, law; equity; justice; crying out for justice, complaint; revenge'. (Platts p.499)

 

faryaad : 'Exclamation; lamentation; cry for help, or redress; complaint; charge; suit'. (Platts p.780)

S. R. Faruqi:

Looking at the general level of Mir's verses, this verse doesn't have a very lofty rank. But if we compare it to this verse of Faiz's, then the difference between classical ghazal and Faiz's ghazal can become clear:

bedaad-garo;N kii bastii hai yaa;N daad kahaa;N ;xairaat kahaa;N
sar pho;Rtii phirtii hai naa-daa;N faryaad jo dar dar jaatii hai

[it's a town of injustice-doers here-- where is justice, where generosity?
the foolish complaint wanders, beating its brow, as it goes from door to door]

Faiz's verse has 'mood', but because of the excess of words and the lack of 'affinity' his verse has fallen from any elevated rank. By contrast, in Mir's verse every word is effective. Mir's verse undoubtedly has mood; it also has aspects of meaning.

The first point is that the rulers of the city of beauty are one group of people, and in the second line the people who have been called murderers are another group of people. That is, the rulers of the city of beauty are tyrants because the rulers of the city of beauty are always tyrants. They are 'cruelty-inventors' because not only do they themselves exercise tyranny, but they also don't prevent others from exercising tyranny. If anyone would murder anyone, they don't care about it. A second proof of their being 'cruelty-inventors' is that in their domain, against such murderers there is neither justice nor complaint.

The second point is that when the ordinary inhabitants of the city of beauty are such oppressors that whenever they wish, they kill whomever they wish, then what will the rulers of that city be like? What level of tyrants and oppressors will they be?

The third point is that if we take the first line to be rhetorical, then the interpretation will be that someone has said that the rulers of the city of beauty are not cruelty-inventors. In reply to this, the speaker has said, 'How could it be that they would not be cruelty-inventors? Why, things there are such that if anyone would kill anyone...'. In the light of this interpretation, the word :zaalim is not a quality of the rulers of the city of beauty, but instead becomes a vocative. That is, 'Oh tyrant, what are you saying? How would the rulers of the city of beauty not be cruelty-inventors?'.

The word vaa;N has also been used very well, because its reference is both to the city of beauty, and also to its rulers. In Faiz's verse the design/harmony is low-level by comparison, and in the mood there's a trace of self-pity. Mir's design/harmony is lofty, and in his verse the mood is one of protest.

The final point is that in Mir's first line :zaalim can also be an exclamation of emotion and emphasis. That is, 'The rulers of the city of beauty, how tyrannical those cruelty-inventors are!'

FWP:

SETS == MIDPOINTS
MOTIFS == COMMERCE
NAMES
TERMS

In the second line, vaa;N is a 'midpoints' word, positioned so that it can easily be read either with the clause before, or with the clause after.

The word daad has an excellently relevant range of meanings (see the definition above)-- it can refer to the 'justice' provided by a court, or an appeal for such justice, or a 'complaint' (of the denial of justice). Even more pointedly, faryaad can refer to the lover's everyday behavior ('exclamation, lamentation, cry for help') or to a specifically legal sense ('complaint, charge, suit')-- the sense in which a 'plaintiff' in court is called a faryaadii .

For the rulers of the city of beauty to provide no daad is not so surprising-- when was the beautiful beloved ever other than cruel and tyrannical? But to be deprived even of the chance to make a faryaad is to be hopelessly oppressed. Since the lover's everyday behavior could be described as a faryaad , how cruel it is to deny him even the chance for self-expression! He is thus oppressed both as a city-dweller (since the rulers provide no system for lodging complaints in court and receiving official justice), and as a lover (since he's not even allowed to complain and lament).

Note for grammar and meter fans: The form kyuu;N-kih is really just shortened from kyuu;N-kar , to suit the meter.

Note for translation fans: Isn't it exasperating that English creates those extra 'there' occurrences? It risks confusing people by being juxtaposed to the real 'there' right before them. It would be better if we could say 'there, no justice is, no complaint is'-- but that looks distractingly wrong-headed.