Ghazal 82, Verse 3x


asad fareftah-e inti;xaab-e :tarz-e jafaa
vagarnah dil-barii-e va((dah-e vafaa ma((luum

1) Asad is beguiled/seduced by the selection of the style/manner of cruelty
2) otherwise, the heart-stealingness of the promise/vow of faithfulness {is / would be}-- 'known' [to be nothing]!


fareftah : 'Deceived, deluded; seduced; infatuated; fascinated, charmed, enamoured; —s.m. & f. Deluded person; doter, &c.'. (Platts p.781)


inti;xaab : 'Extraction; extract; selection; election, choice'. (Platts p.86)


:tarz : 'Form, shape, fashion; way of acting, style of conduct, manner, way'. (Platts p.752)


jafaa : 'Oppression, violence, cruelty, injury, injustice, hardship'. (Platts p.382)


Asad is beguiled/seduced by the fact that this innovative style of cruelty of hers, too, is choice/select. Otherwise, the heart-stealingness of a vow of faithfulness is 'known' [to be nothing], nor does it have any special effect. So to speak, even her making a vow is one kind of cruelty.

== Asi, p. 156


That is, don't consider that Asad was deceived by the vow, and so gave his heart away! Not at all. Rather, he is beguiled/seduced by the choice/select beauty of the style of cruelty. And you have made the vow of faithfulness an adornment of cruelty. That's all-- it was over this very style/grace that he sacrificed his life and his heart.

== Zamin, p. 223

Gyan Chand:

In the promise of faithfulness there's nothing to bewitch our heart, because we know that she absolutely won't be faithful. Despite this, we find the promise of faithfulness pleasing. The reason is that we like the choiceness/selectedness of this style of oppression/cruelty.

== Gyan Chand, p. 252


VOWS: {20,2}

For background see S. R. Faruqi's choices. For more on Ghalib's unpublished verses, see the discussion in {4,8x}.

As we hear the first line, the speaker presents himself as an admiring connoisseur-- he uses inti;xaab , the word for a particular 'selection' of poetry, made from a larger body of material. And this 'selection' is based on 'style, manner' [:tarz], which too is often a literary term (see for example {155,3}). Of course, it's also a more general term-- as in this case, for we then at once learn that the 'style' in question is a 'style of cruelty/oppression'.

The speaker thus admires the quality and 'choiceness' of the beloved's 'style of cruelty', or else the elegance or appropriateness with which she has 'selected' that particular style from all the others in her reprtoire. He's really not a sucker, he assures us-- he's certainly not seduced by her notoriously and obviously empty promises of faithfulness! (For more on the idiomatic uses of ma((luum , see {4,3}.)

Rather, as a connoisseur he's beguiled by the elegance, appropriateness, charm, wit, etc., of the 'style' of her cruelty. That, he insists, is an entirely different matter: he's an accomplice, not a victim. Or does he protest too much? As so often, it's left up to us to decide.