Ghazal 234, Verse 11

Nazm:

In the first line he has collected together pairs of synonymous words: na.siir and mu((iin ; and dii;N and millat ; and mulk and daulat . (266)

== Nazm page 266

Bekhud Dihlavi:

He says he is a helper of realm and faith, and also a lawgiver of religious-community and land. And he's a person such that the lofty sphere has been made [banaayaa gayaa hai] for the sake of being his abode. (326)

Bekhud Mohani:

Helper of faith and world, and supporter of community and land, for whom the lofty sky has been made [banaayaa gayaa hai] in order to become an abode. (507)

FWP:

SETS
SKY {15,7}

The nature of this verse as the third in a kind of four-verse verse-set is discussed in {234,8}.

Here's another verse ideally suited to support my argument made in {234,8}. I'd give this one away too, if anyone wants it.

Since it makes no sense as an independent verse, it certainly seems to require the frame of some kind of verse-set around it.

Instinctively, both Bekhuds convert the verb from the awkward intransitive [banaa hai] into the much more coherent passive [banaayaa gayaa hai]. The intransitive provides the same opening for the second line as in {234,9}. Why is Ghalib so eager to present 'enjoyment' in {234,9}, and the 'lofty sphere' in the present verse, as somehow simply 'coming into being' or 'appearing', with no hint of a maker lurking in the background? I would have guessed that it's because it's so silly and insulting to God to say that he did all this just for a minor North Indian aristocrat-- but then, in the first line of {234,9} the poet does say exactly this. So why, after that one time, does he work around it with the awkwardly organic intransitive forms? I don't know, and the verse is so puerile that I don't care. There's a similar structure in the next verse, {234,12}, too.