yih kahaa;N kii dostii hai kih bane hai;N dost
ko))ii chaarah-saaz hotaa ko))ii ;Gam-gusaar hotaa
1a) what kind of friendship is this, that friends have
1b) what kind of friendship is this, that the Advisor has become a friend?!
2a) if someone had been a helper, if someone had been a sympathizer!
2b) if there had been some helper, if there had been some sympathizer!
*Platts Dictionary Online*
The complaint about the friends is, why have they
resolved on giving advice? (21)
== Nazm page 21
Every friend has become an Advisor and exhorts me
to renounce passion. If the claim of friendship had been observed,
they would have treated the pain of my passion and thought of ways to
restore the damage of grief. (42)
What can be said about the pleasure of the speech! The
countenance of the style is worth seeing. He says that the friends have
become Advisors. (78)
SETS == EXCLAMATION;
I especially enjoy Josh's remarks, because they're as rhetorical
as the original verse, and they also point up the degree to which the commentators
award a monopoly to (1a), the more grammatically straightforward meaning,
and completely exclude the equally possible (1b). But with only one meaning,
where's the punch in this verse?
In support of (1b) can be offered the carefully contrived
second line, which is equally applicable to either (1a) or (1b), and is ruefully
amusing in either case. Whether my friends become Advisors, or the Advisor
becomes my friend, I'm equally out of luck. They are all well-meaning no doubt,
but they can't or won't give me what I want. They are all trying to discourage
my passion on prudential grounds, but I reject those out of hand. I don't
want someone to exhort and advise me out of my passion, I want someone to
help me endure it, and to sympathize with me. My friends, who should do this,
have taken alarm at my condition and have shifted to the Advisor's side; and/or
the Advisor (who is given the plural verb out of respect) is offering me a
well-meant but false 'friendship' that doesn't fool me for a minute.
And, of course, 'what kind of friendship is this?' might
be more than a rhetorical question, but an actual exploratory one. In which
case we could wonder whether one phrase of the second line applies to the
friends, and the other to the Advisor, so that two kinds of friendship are
envisioned? Or are both phrases applicable to both, since their behavior is
equally remote from actual friendship? Ghalib's inshaa))iyah discourse
somehow never will hold still long enough to be nailed down.