naqsh faryaadii hai kis kii shoKHii-i tahriir kaa
kaaGhazii hai pairahan har paikar-e tasviir kaa

Whose crafty creation am I; the image implores –
Every image stands enrobed – but in paper robes

Ghalib opens his diivaan with a unique stroke of his genius. The imploring in the first line, followed by an answer in the second line, opens up various avenues of interpretation. The implication here is that the implorer is seeking justice as he has been subjected to oppression. Apart from being an individual, he is also a stock figure – an everyman – in a state of eternal entreaty, insofar as he represents the perpetual human condition marked by suffering. This imploring is being made to God, or to the one in the seat of power on this earth. The implorer thus underlines what we know today as a discourse on the dialectics of power and powerlessness, or the oppressor and the oppressed. Interestingly, the image of the implorer is also like the one that a painter paints on a paper canvas, puts in a frame and hangs on a wall, as a reminder of the eternal human condition. In this much-debated but iconic verse, Ghalib creates a cosmos of meaning relating to the metaphysical meaning of human existence and survival which constitutes the kernel of his poetry at large.

It should now be easy to mark the significance of the deeply implicated questions Ghalib puts frontally: (a) whose caprice, or craft, does the image stand as witness to? (b) why has the creator cast the image in a paper robe, which is essentially ephemeral? (c) is the creator a flippant being to have done so? (d) why is the created one so still and silent in his protest and appeal? and (e) is it the individual or the entire phenomenon, which is subjected to eternal suffering? Answers to all these questions are clearly self-suggestive.

Ghalib was once told to his face that this was a meaningless verse. He then asked a friend in a letter to listen to the “meaning of this meaningless verse” and related it to a custom in Iran where the appellant used to put on a paper robe and appear before the ruler to protest and seek justice. This was similar to carrying a lighted torch in India, or hanging the blood-soaked clothes of the murdered one on a stick in Arabia. This allusion takes us to the heart of the verse and adds to its foundational strength. Far from being meaningless, this verse represents a metaphysical meaning. This is one of the most precise verses of Ghalib where words act like metaphors: naqsh for the picture of suffering, faryaadii for the oppressed ones, shoKHii-i tahriir for the craftiness of scripting, kaaGhazii for ephemerality, pairahan for perishability, and paikar-e tasviir for the suffering human being inside a robe, which together bears the structural and thematic burden of the verse.

jazba-i be-iKHtiyaar-e shauq dekhaa chaahiye
siina-i shamshiir se baahar hai dam shamshiir kaa

This uncontrollable passion, this ardour,
is worth a watch indeed
The sparkle of a scimitar shows
beyond its breath, beyond its breed

The passion of genuine lovers for their love is always uncontrollable. An idea as simple as this gets an exceptionally rich poetical configuration with the terribly beautiful image of a shamshiir (scimitar). Ghalib invites us to watch the lover’s ardour and zeal in terms of the sparkling scimitar, which compares well with the sparkling desire of lovers for each other. As the scimitar’s sparkle shows beyond its sheath and sharpness, the verse is enriched with multiple imports with reference to the desire of the lovers. It is in this aspect that the unique beauty of the verse lies.

A master of creating connotations, Ghalib projects several possible meanings for us. He seems to suggest: (a) the scimitar lies breathing as if in the sheath of its own breast, just as the passion of lovers breathes in their breasts (b) just as the scimitar cannot hold its sparkle within its own breast, the lovers too cannot hold their desire within their breasts (c) the lovers’ overwhelming passion is as sparkling as the scimitar itself, and (d) the sparkling edge of the scimitar and the lovers’ heart, brimming with desire, are two images of the same beauty and they reflect upon each other.

Two expressions, in particular, hold the key to this verse. While siina-i shamshiir (cutting-edge of scimitar) implies the shining breast of the scimitar, dam (sparkle/breath) suggests the breath of life. Both these expressions are metaphorically charged and are richly suggestive in the larger context of the verse. Importantly enough, the second line far outweighs the first line in its impact, as the first one is only an inviting statement, while the second one flows out of it with its own resilience to complete the web of meaning. The verse clearly works through the device of establishing a reason to express a reason which adds a magical quality to it. We may refer to another verse of Ghalib here to mark how differently he plays upon the sparkling beauty of a scimitar here: ‘ishrat-e qatl-gahe ahl-e tamannaa mat puuchh / ‘iid-e nazzara hai shamshiir kaa ‘uryaa.n honaa. If we consider the two verses together, we may mark how a poet’s imagination soars to seek poetic strength in different verses with different images.

thaa KHvaab mei.n KHayaal ko tujh se mu‘aamila
jab aa.nkh khul gaii na ziyaa.n thaa na suud thaa

In dream, my thoughts had a deal with you to obtain
But when the eyes opened, there was no loss, no gain

The two states of dream and awakening have long constituted the major themes in the poetry of love and longing. Ghalib mythicizes this common experience in this verse. In plain terms, the lover suggests that in his dream his thoughts had a deal with his beloved but when he woke up, he realized that the deal got him neither a profit nor a loss. This brings a sense of futility to the lover and makes him reflect upon his miserable predicament.

Playing upon these two states, Ghalib imagines such prospects for the lover that portray him in a truly romantic disposition. Several possible interpretations come to the fore: (a) in psychological terms, dreams are the manifestations of desires lying in the subconscious, which, in this case, relates with the lover’s desire for union with the beloved (b) it was the thought, not the lover, that had a deal with the beloved in his dream (c) the thought could be the lover’s persona itself (d) this thought could also be of a sexual or material nature, as the word mu‘aamila suggests in semantic terms (e) dreams are deceptions and are soon forgotten, and finally, (f) the dream could be meaningful if metaphorical, but meaningless if literal.

The kernel of meaning in the first line lies in three inter-contextual words – KHvaab (dream), KHayaal (thought) and mu‘aamala (deal) – that collectively create a context for the lover to engage with himself. They make way for the concluding thought in the second line that highlights the essence of reality which, upon awakening, brings to the lover in terms of ziyaa.n (loss) and suud (gain). The second line completes the circle of meaning, and leaves the lover forlorn and wondering. This verse acquires its strength in the way Ghalib defines the two states of being for the lover and how he places him in those states. Interestingly enough, he also defines how the lover can find himself in two different states when his eyes are closed and when his eyes are open. The hiatus between the two states is where lies the crucial meaning of the verse which may be appreciated further with reference to the disinhibition model of hallucination theory.

Excerpted with permission from The Essential Ghalib, translated from the Urdu by Anisur Rahman, HarperCollins India.