Ghazal 62, Verse 11

{62,11}

hai;N aur bhii dunyaa me;N su;xan-var bahut achchhe
kahte hai;N kih ;Gaalib kaa hai andaaz-e bayaa;N aur

1) there are in the world even/also more very good poets/wordsmiths
2) they say that Ghalib's is a style of expression [that is] other/more

Notes:

aur : 'And, also, for the rest, besides; again, moreover; but, yet, still; over, else; ...another, other, different; more, additional'. (Platts p.104)

 

su;xan-var : 'Eloquent'. (Platts p.645)

Nazm:

Since the subject of 'say' is *omitted, the meaning arises that this matter is widespread and commonly known. (64)

== Nazm page 64

Bekhud Dihlavi:

He says, in the world there are also other very good poets. But it is accepted, everybody says with one voice, that Mirza Ghalib's style of speech is distinct from everybody's. (This is Mirza Sahib's specialty.) (111)

Bekhud Mohani:

That is, no one has been endowed with a style of speech like his. (143)

FWP:

SETS == POETRY
SPEAKING: {14,4}

Since this whole ghazal is a kind of riff on the creative possibilities of aur , this closing-verse ends it delightfully. Here we see two occurrences of aur -- the only such repeated use outside the opening-verse (in which of course it was compulsory). And this time, the meanings of aur seem to be deliberately controlled: they are divided such that one meaning is chiefly emphasized in the first line, the other in the second.

In the first line, the general sentence structure, and especially the use of the phrase aur bhii , makes it clear that we're basically in the 'additional, more of the same' domain. There are many more very good poets in the world, Ghalib affirms magnanimously. Already we can tell that there is at least one additional very good poet who is not included in this particular line, since aur bhii requires a starting point to which its contents will be additional. Just as in English, the difference is between 'there are many very good poets in the world' and 'there are many more very good poets in the world'. It is clear that these poets are being relegated to the sidelines. We are being set up, both grammatically and psychologically, for a punchline in the second verse.

In the second line, we learn that 'they'-- the subject is omitted but can here be assumed to be the generalized 'they'-- say that Ghalib's is a 'style of expression' [andaaz-e bayaa;N] that is 'different' or 'other' [aur] from that of the rest of the 'very good poets'-- and in this verse 'poets' is su;xan-var , which literally means 'those eloquent in speech', so we have a verse entirely focused on saying/speaking (three instances in two lines).

In the second line, to take aur as simply 'additional, more of the same' would make nonsense of the verse. To end lingeringly on aur , in its strong sense, creates a well-earned claim of mystery, originality, even uniqueness. When 'they' say such things about Ghalib, they're right, and after reading even this ghazal alone, we know it.