mere hone me;N hai kyaa rusvaa))ii
ay vuh majlis nahii;N ;xalvat hii sahii
1a) what's the disgrace/exposure in my presence/existence?
1b) what disgrace/exposure there is in my presence/existence!
1c) as if there's disgrace/exposure in my presence/existence!
2) either way-- if not in a gathering, then in solitude/privacy, indeed
;xalvat : 'Loneliness, solitude; seclusion, retirement, privacy; a vacant place, a private place or apartment, a closet, &c. (to which one retires for privacy); a cell (for religious retirement); —private conference'. (Platts p.493)
He says, if I meet with you in private, then in that what disgrace will there be for you? To meet in both places is the same thing-- if not indeed a gathering [nah sahii], then at least in private [sahii]. (214)
Whether it be your gathering or in private, if we would remain there, what kind of disgrace is this to you? That is, you and we are both free from sin. Or this: that we are your true lover. The subtle meaning in this verse is that the lover considers that from giving true lovers a space near her, the beloved can't at all be disgraced....
In this place, ay vuh is extremely enjoyable. In it is hidden the picture of the beloved's becoming very angry, and the lover's giving her a reply. (286)
For discussion of the versatile idiomatic expression hii sahii , see {148,1}.
As in so many verses, kyaa is beautifully positioned to do its threefold work-- it can generate a genuine, thoughtful question (1a), an affirmative exclamation (1b), or an indignantly negative exclamation (1c). On the meaning of rusvaa))ii as first 'public exposure', then by extension 'disgrace', see {20,9}.
In the first line, the ambiguity of mere hone me;N , literally 'in my being', leaves us poised between two interpretations. It can easily mean either 'in my existing', or 'in my being there'. We await the second line, expecting to have the question resolved. And is it resolved? Of course not. The equation of company and solitude could perfectly well apply to my presence in the beloved's company, as the commentators maintain.
But it could equally well apply to my very existence, which either might be, or is, or isn't, a disgrace in itself, whether in company or in solitude. After all, not a single word in the verse explicitly introduces the beloved. We know the lover seems to be having some kind of a semi-exasperated or rueful discussion with somebody, even perhaps to be berating somebody-- but the somebody could very well be himself. This verse could very well be a less grim (because more multivalent) reframing of {3,5}.
Nazm:
In this the phrase ay vuh is very subtle-- only the real knowers of language [ahl-e zabaan] will understand it. (156)
== Nazm page 156