Ghazal 120, Verse 6

Nazm:

That is, my madness is of such an order that iron itself longs to become chains and be honored by nearness to me. Here, the nasalization of the full nuun in kaan seems displeasing. (129)

== Nazm page 129

Bekhud Dihlavi:

He says, the rank of my madness is proved by this statement: that hearing mention of the making of chains for my feet, the jauhar of the iron made the iron restless in the mine. That is, it wanted to somehow emerge from the mine and become chains for the feet of this madman. (182)

Bekhud Mohani:

My madness is of such a rank that even iron (which is lifeless) is becoming restless to kiss my feet. And the jauhar of the iron has become, for the iron, a thorn in its garment. (243)

FWP:

SETS == MUSHAIRAH; WORDPLAY
BONDAGE: {1,5}
JAUHAR: {5,4}
MADNESS: {14,3}

The special enjoyableness of this verse rests on what is surely a form of iihaam or deliberate poetic misdirection. In classic mushairah-verse style, the first line piques our curiosity but is tantalizingly incomplete. Such enjambement is not too common in ghazal lines, but it's not all that rare either. When after a suitably suspenseful delay we're allowed to hear the second line, we of course hear kaa;N me;N as 'in the ear', since the first line has made us expect to be told what happens when a 'mention' [charchaa] occurs. Not until the last possible moment are we told that the subject of all this action is 'iron'.

Then with a shock of amusement and pleasure we go back and revise our understanding of kaa;N me;N to mean first of all 'in the mine', since whether or not the iron may also have an 'ear', it's much more plausibly and surely located in a 'mine'. Since kaan meaning 'ear' is an Indic-side word, it actually can't, or at least shouldn't, be shortened through nasalization in such a way; but even the hearer who knows this will surely take a minute, under the evocative circumstances of the verse, to actually remember the fact. So in practice, the effect of misdirection will be achieved.

If we read only or chiefly 'mine', as in (2a), then the iron in the mine, even before it's smelted and forged, somehow longs and quivers to become chains for my feet. And of course, the reason my feet need chains in the first place is because in the betaabii of my madness I can't be still; now this very betaabii is transferred to the future chains themselves. By jauhar we might then understand 'excellence' or 'essence' (with wordplay involving 'gem' or 'jewel'), since the truest and highest future destiny of the iron (chaining an unchainable madman? approaching a lover of such lofty destiny?) is calling out to it and evoking a response.

If we read 'ear' as well, as in (2b), then we imagine that the iron is already forged; it now has little temper-lines that resemble the tiny cilia in the ear, and quiver when a sound reaches them. Thus the bar of iron, having already been through the experience of forging, has a primitive anthropomorphic identity, and 'listens' to words through its 'ear', and can react appropriately.

But does the iron also in fact have an 'ear'? If we consider that it doesn't have an ear, then the verse has an iihaam in the full classic sense: the meaning we're led to expect is not applicable, while only a more uncommon meaning is applicable. If we consider that it does have an ear, then the verse rests on the wordplay of the two meanings of kaa;N me;N .

Not only can that question be argued at length, but there are also such a number of possibly and variously relevant meanings of jauhar (see definition above) that there's no danger of our exhausting the verse too quickly.

And if a sword can have a breath, as in {1,3}, doesn't that increase the likelihood that iron might have some sort of resonant, metallic, scratchily ciliated ear?