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 choice/selection of the style/manner of cruelty/oppression
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)

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 selection of this style of oppression/cruelty. (252)


VOWS: {20,2}

For background see S. R. Faruqi's choices.

As we hear the first line, the speaker presents himself as an admiring connoisseur-- he uses inti;xaab , the word for a 'selection' of particularly choice poetry, the best of a much 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 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.