takalluf bar-:taraf na:z:zaaragii me;N bhii
sahii lekin
vuh dekhaa jaa))e kab yih :zulm dekhaa jaa))e hai mujh se
1a) to tell the truth, even when [I am engaged] in
spectatorship indeed-- still,
1b) to put aside formality, even when [she is] under observation, so be
it-- but
2) that she would be seen-- since when is this outrage/cruelty [to be] {'looked
upon' / endured} by me?
na:z:zaarah : 'Sight, view, look, show; inspection; --amorous glance, ogling'. (Platts p.1142)
na:z:zaaragii : 'Seeing, looking at; sight; observation; --s.m. Beholder, spectator'. (Platts p.1142)
He says, I accept that I too am among her beholders. But this outrage will never be 'looked upon' by me, that people would see her. What the hell [bhalaa]-- how can this envy/jealousy be acceptable to me? (290)
The truth is that even after the beholders are disgraced to whatever degree, we can't 'look upon' the outrage that we would see the beloved in such a situation, when other people too would be present. In such a situation we consent to remain deprived of a sight of her. (410)
SETS == IDIOMS; REPETITION
Here is a spectacular (and what a perfect adjective!) display of word-play and meaning-play most enjoyably working together. In the obvious reading of the first line (1a), the common petrified phrase takalluf bar-:taraf works almost the way 'to tell the truth' does in English, as a sentence-introducer that promises to 'cut to the chase' or get right to the heart of the matter. For more examples and discussion of this phrase, see {65,1}. And the rest of the first line continues to prepare us colloquially for something else: the concessive 'even in spectatorship, indeed' (on the colloquial use of sahii see {9,4}) is then followed by the 'but'. Thus we have a first line that is focused obsessively on the second line, preparing us in three different ways to pay attention to what is to come.
Then the second line introduces a very clever obsession of its own: a 'repetition' of dekhaa jaa))e that is really only apparent. The first occurrence is straightforward: 'would be seen', a passive subjunctive. The second occurrence is part of dekhaa jaa))e hai , which is an archaic form of dekhaa jaataa hai , a passive habitual. Its literal meaning is thus 'is (habitually) seen', but it has a strong colloquial sense of absolute refusal: this is not to be seen, not to be 'looked upon' by me. (For more discussion of this idiomatic usage, see {205,4}.
What is it that can't be tolerated, can't be borne, can't be 'looked upon' by me? Why, that she would be 'looked upon', of course. I naturally can't bear that she would be 'looked upon' by others-- and this is true even when I myself am among the others, the 'lookers'-- as we learned in the first line. And now that we're returning in our minds to the first line, we notice another and more literal reading: that of (1b). For the first line can also be taken as describing her behavior: 'to put aside formality' when 'in' or under 'observation'-- this too works perfectly, though differently, with the rest of the verse.
The basic idea is thus a commonplace one: that the lover is so jealous that he can't stand to have anybody look at the beloved-- including himself. But what other poet can offer us such an ambivalent but enticing souffle of beholding, seeing, 'looking upon', spectatorship-- enhanced by our own 'participant observer' role in putting it all together?
Nazm:
The meaning of na:z:zaaragii is 'beholders'. That is, even if I too would be among the beholders, what of it? When will I be able to 'look upon' this outrage: that she would be seen; that is, that Others would see her-- when would this be acceptable to me? (232)