ya((nii bah-;hasb-e gardish-e paimaanah-e
.sifaat
((aarif hameshah mast-e mai-e ;zaat chaahiye
1) that is, in conformity/proportion to the going-around
of the {wine-glass / measure} of qualities,
2) a mystical-knower always intoxicated with the wine of Being is needed
;hasb : 'Computing; considering, reflecting upon; --sufficiency, a thing sufficing or sufficient for; quantity, etc. (see ;hisaab ); --adv. Agreeably (to), conformably (to), according (to), in conformity (with); as'. (Platts p.477)
paimaanah : 'A measure (for dry or wet goods); measure (of length, or capacity, &c.)... a cup, bowl, goblet'. (Platts p.301)
He says, according to the intoxication of the circling of the wine-glass of qualities, the mystical knower ought always to be intoxicated with Being. (196)
This is the final verse of a four-verse verse-set; for discussion see {131,6}. The ya((nii could be thought of as introducing a paraphrase, or a summing-up, of the other verses of the verse-set.
The complexity of this verse depends above all on the lovely word- and meaning-play of paimaanah ; it effortlessly unites the sense of measurement or proportion (as in ;hasb ) with the wine imagery ( gardish / mast / mai ). Here are some of the possible emphases:
=just as the wine-glass is there, so an appropriate drinker needs to be there
=just the way the wine-glass keeps on circulating no matter what, similarly a drinker is needed who is intoxicated no matter what
=in proportion to how amply the wine-glass (always) keeps circulating, the drinker too always needs to be (proportionately amply) intoxicated
As for the relationship of the relationship of the wine-glass of 'qualities' [.sifaat] and the intoxication with 'Being' [;zaat], we're left entirely on our own. Are the qualities aspects of being, and thus legitimately intoxicating in their own right? Are they preludes to being, so that they have to be transcended (the way wine-drinking enables you to reach a level beyond wine-drinking)? Are they something that a person has lots of, or only one of (the way each flower has its own one color in {131,7}? Is the mystic-knower intoxicated with his own qualities alone, or with the spectacle of everybody's, or with something deeper (the way the tree is different from the branches in {131,6})? Is 'Being' an intoxicant like wine, or like prayer? Or are the two the same? (This question is especially relevant in view of the ya((nii and the fact that the immediately preceding verse is {131,8}.)
And finally, by whom or what is such a drinker 'needed'? By God? By the scheme of things? By the poet's esthetic or mystical sense of fitness? This little verse-set, fresh and lovely as a rose, is surrounded by thorny questions well-contrived to leave scratches in our minds.
Nazm:
[See his comments for the whole verse-set: {131,6}.]