کفرودیں چیست؟ جر آلايش پنداروجود

پاک شو پاک کہ ہم کفر تو دین تو شود

kufr o d~in ch~ist juz ~al~a’ish-i pind~ar-i vuj~ud

p~ak shav p~ak keh ham kufr-i t~u d~in-i t~u shaved

{What is unbelief and faith except the polluted conceit of one’s existence? Purify yourself so that your unbelief becomes your belief.}

دیر و حرم آئینہ ء تکرار تمنا

واماندگی شوق تراشے ہے پناہیں

dair o |haram ~a’~inah-yi takr~ar-i tamanna

v~ama~_ndagi-yi shauq tar~ashe hai pan~ahe__n

{The mosque and the temple are mirror images reflecting recurrence of desire; these are (no more than) places of refuge manufactured by the fatigue of human yearnings.}

ہستی کے مت فریب میں آجائیو’اسد

عالم    تمام  حلقۂ  دام خیال      ہے

hasti ke mat fareb men ~aj~a’iyyo, Asad

‘~alam tam~am |halqah-yi d~am-i _k_hay~al hai

{Do not be deceived by existence, Asad! The entire universe is a circle of the net of illusion.} 

 

اصل شہود و شاہد و مشہود ایک ہے

حیراں ہوں پھر مشاہدہ ہے کس حساب میں

a|sl-i shuh~ud o sh~ahid o mashh~ud aik hai

|hair~an h~un phir mush~ahadah hai kis |his~ab me__n

{The essence of shuh~ud (a stage in ta|savvuf when everything existing becomes the Truth-in-itself), sh~ahid (witness), and the mashh~ud (spectacle being observed by all) being the same; I wonder, how to account for the mush~ahadah (witnessing, spectacle).}

 

نیکی زتست از تو نخواہیم مزد کار

ور خود بدیم کار تو ایم انتقام چیست؟

nek~i ze tust az t~u na-khv~ahaim muzd-i k~ar

var _k_hud badaim k~ar-i t~uaim intiq~am ch~ist?

{Righteous action coming as it does from You (God), I do not ask for any payment (muzd) for my deeds; and if I commit evil, that is also from you; then where is the justification for revenge?}

 

وفاداری بہ شرط استواری اصل ایماں ہے

مر بت خانے میں تو کعبے میں گاڑو برہمن کو

vaf~~ad~ari ba-shar_t-i ustv~ari a|sl-i ~im~a__n hai

mare butk_h~ane men to Ka‘be men g~a|ro Brahman ko

{Fidelity with steadfastness is the essence of faith; (therefore) if a Brahman dies in a house of idols (temple), bury him in theKa‘ba.}

 

نہ تھا کچھ تو خدا تھا‘ کچھ نہ ہوتا تو خدا ہوتا

ڈبو یا مجھ کو ہونے نے‘ نہ ہوتا میں تو کیا ہوتا

nah tha kuch to _k___hud~a th~a, kuch nah hot~a to _k___huda hot~a

duboy~a mujh ko hone ne, nah hot~a mae_n to _k_hud~a hota!

 

{When there was nothing, (only) God existed, had there been nothing, God would have been; my being spoiled me, had I been non-existent, what would I have been!}

In a letter, Ghalib writes: “In my whole life, had I not drunk wine, even once, call me a non-believer, had I offered prayer even once, call me a sinner.”

“My object is expression of my ‘belief’ so that it is known that a person holding this ‘belief’ does not refute anything and, (on the other hand) embraces all in a (particular) state (kaif~iyat) … of unbelief (kufr) as well as Islam,‘ain (عین), (in Sufism, the inner essence of a thing and more specifically, the universal idea of a thing eternally existing in the mind of God) as well as _g_hair, (غیر), the other).1 All these exist as thought (tassavur) but not as the ‘thought’ which we think, but that  thought which is possessed by a special state (kaif~iyat-i __k_h~a|s). It is quite apt to describe this with the simile of sea and wave and sun and light.” (letter to _G_hamg~in)

“I am a pure believer in one God (m~uva|h|hid-i __k_h~ali|s) and a person of perfect faith (momin). On my tongue ‘there is no god except Allah’ and, in my heart, I have understood that nothing exists except Allah, nothing impacts on existence except Allah. All messengers deserve respect and all, in their times, were to be obeyed. Messengership ended with Muhammad. He is the seal of messengerhood and mercy for the world. The end of prophethood is the beginning of im~amat (the Sh~i‘ah espousal of head of state as different from the Sunni subscription to _k_hil~afat). Im~amat is not held by consensus or ijm~a‘ which is what Sunnis hold to) but is transferred from Allah to ‘Ali, then to |Hasan, then to |Husain and so on. I dwell by these (beliefs) and will die holding them. (in a letter)

جن لوگوں کو ہے مجھ   سے عداوت گہری

کہتے ہیں مجھے وہ  رافضی  اور دہری

دہری  کیونکر ہو جو ہوے  صوفی

شیعی کیونکر ہو ما ورا النہری

jin logo_n ko hai mujh se ‘ad~avat gahri

kahte hai_n mujhe r~afi_zi aur dahri

dahri ku_nkar ho jo keh hovay S~ufi

Shi‘~i kyu_nkar ho m~avar~aunnahri

 

{Those who hate me intensely, call me Shi ‘ah and heretic. How can a Sufi be a heretic? How can one who is of Transoxiana (a region inhabited by Sunnis) be a Shi‘ah?}

If these couplets and statements are treated as representing different views of Ghalib, then he emerges as one declaring, ‘I am a Shi‘ah, an atheist (dahri), a non-believer (k~afir), a sinner (gunahg~ar), monotheist (muvahhid) and a true Muslim (momin). Unbelief and Islam,‘ain (for the Sufis, it means the universal idea of a thing eternally existing in the mind of God),and _g_hair (the other than God) are acceptable to me. Unbelief and belief are a filth of the conceit of existence. The Ka‘bah and the temple are refuge for the fatigue of shauq (the human urge to know reality). The Creator of my good deeds is Allah; why should I ask for any reward for my meritorious actions? Allah is also the creator of evil; then why should I be punished for my evil acts? If fidelity (vaf~ad~ari) is steadfast, then both the Muslim priest and the Brahman are people of faith (~im~an). In any case, what is the big deal in engaging in discussions on virtue and vice and unfaith and faith when all these phenomena of existence are vague, absurd, and all is a net of imagination and superstition? What exists is the Absolute Reality, Allah, and He will always exist. When I was non-existent, I was Allah; just imagine what I would I have been had I not come into existence.

These feelings, like shadows, crisscross and cut into each other as if they are views of different persons, as if there is not one Ghalib but many, each struggling against the other and refusing to form any one clear picture. How many difficulties has Ghalib created for his admirers and critics! But, then, is formation of any one single picture necessary? Is it not possible for the poetry of Ghalib to survive without an organised thought-system?  Some people think so. In spite of these different mental attitudes, readers of Ghalib find in him the peculiar thought and creative intellectual and emotional satisfaction not to be found in any other poet. Does it mean that creative thought and creative expression are beyond the realm of philosophical discipline and mental and logical frontiers? It appears that only creativity is the guarantee of the popularity and durability of a piece of literature or fine art. Here, creativity means the ability to satisfy readers’ emotional and intellectual thirst. A piece of literature recreates itself for its readers every moment. As long as this process maintains itself, the poetry and art form would be able to maintain its popularity and importance among its readers, listeners or viewers. If this is so, then Ghalib renders all philosophical, intellectual, and logical challenges ineffective due to his boundless creativity. Still, the question remains as to how in its inner depths such great creativity could bear so much mutually contradictory plurality? Let us try to find out how Ghalib managed to make ‘Being’ and its multiple appearances, on the one hand, and, his struggle to survive amidst the conflicts between religion and the material world, on the other, a part of his creativity in a way that all these various themes and aesthetic images and values became an indivisible part of the mind and emotional life of various generations of readers. There is no intention here of portraying Ghalib as a philosopher or a Sufi. The purpose is to discover factors responsible for the transformation of Ghalib’s intellectual concerns related to respect for basic human instincts and human values into his poetry.    

Let us set out on this voyage of discovery with the remark that there is no other Urdu poet as word-conscious as Ghalib. He believes in the independence of the word. He does not use words like masters use their slaves‎— lifeless tools of communication, such as the pen. He uses every word as a live, ever-expanding and evolving universe of meanings. The word is the magic talisman enunciation of which unearths buried treasures of meaning.

By doing so, Ghalib could create in his poetry infinite space for multiple meaningful intellectual layers. Second, Ghalib knew very well that a creation after it is created becomes independent of its creator; the meaning and impact of poetry are not governed by the intent and meaning the poet had in mind. That is, poetry is not the creation exclusively of the poet. The autonomous functioning of language and word also participate in the creation of meanings and, impacting on poetry, ultimately liberate it from the poet. The importance of words and their independence remains intact irrespective of whether the poet is aware of it or not. However, Ghalib was fully aware of these two notions. In other words, both are integral to his poetic sensibilities. It should be noted here that these considerations are applicable more to the ghazal. Due to the features of brevity and bal~a_g_hat (multiplicity of meanings) embedded in the g_hazal, dominance of words in it is far more powerful as compared to the poem (na|zm) and prose. The transformation of intellectual content into aesthetic value is due to these two notions. Ghalib, as we have seen, loves the word. That is why he has ignored taking full responsibility for what he expresses; much has been left to words. This is one of various factors underlying the complexity in his poetry.

 

ہے کہاں تمنا کا دوسرا قدم یا رب

ہم نے دشت امکاں کو ایک نقش پا پایا

hai kah~a_n tamann~a k~a d~usra qadam, ya Rab,

ham ne dasht-i imk~an ko aik naqsh-i p~a p~ay~a

{Where is the next step of Desire, O God? We have found the desert of contingency/ the possible (the universe), to be a mere footprint!}

The interplay featuring desire, the step of desire, the desert of possible creation, the footprint and the interrogative tone has created and remained for the last century and a half an unresolved mystery. One may even wonder whether Ghalib himself was aware of the meanings latent in this couplet. He himself, let us recall, has admitted to the autonomy of words. It is the word itself, he said, that entered into his poetry and asked his readers to treat each word as a talisman for uncovering a buried treasure of meanings.

 

گنجینۂ معنی کا طلسم اس کو سمجھیے

جو لفظ کہ غالب مرے اشعار میں آوے

ganjinah-yi ma‘n~i k~a |tilism is ko samajhiye

jo laf|z kih Ghalib mere ash‘~ar me ~ave

{Generally, the word |tilism has been understood as magic and ganj~inah as treasure. However, this is inadequate as they stand for much more. Ganj means treasure and ganj~inah means a buried treasure. |Tilism, here, is not simple magic but is a |talisman—a magic formula on recitation of which the access to entrance to the buried treasure is revealed. Here, Ghalib is suggesting that every word that appears in his poetry represents multiple meanings.}

For the appreciation of Ghalib, we have to know the Delhi (Dehli or Dilli, the original names) of his time. The British occupation of Delhi in 1857 and the displacement of the symbolic Muslim empire was the beginning of the political domination of Western culture and decline of the   political, social and cultural life of Muslims in India. They found that they were no more the rulers of the country but subjects of a foreign power. Gradually, they also realised that they and the Indian people were being required to put up with the political and administrative reforms being implemented by the colonial rulers and cope with the challenges of change posed by Western knowledge, as well. Nevertheless, Mughal cultural institutions and traditions kept struggling to maintain a proud posture of continuity. Some pillars of the otherwise decaying cultural structure remained standing. Delhi was still a vibrant centre of religious discussion, and academic and literary gatherings. Several high-calibre intellectuals, scholars, writers and poets, along with Ghalib, were keeping the Mughal cultural hub alive. Among his contemporaries, Sh~ah ‘Abdul‘aziz, Sh~ah Ism~a~‘~ill, Sh~ah Saifuddin, Sh~ah ‘Abdulq~adir and Syed A|hmad Barelvi (all from the school of Shah Dalilah), Syed Ahmad _Khan, Maulana Fa_zl-i |Haq _K_hair~ab~adi, Maul~an~a |Sadarudd~in ~Azurdah and, among the poets, Sh~ah Na|s~ir, Momin, Sheftah, ~Atish, N~asi_k_h, Sahb~a’~i, represented the culture of Delhi and the North-Western Province.  During this time, Dehli witnessed several political and violent pogroms. It was destroyed twice during the 1857 War. The ‘ulam~a of north India, too were politically active. Maul~an~a Fazl-i Haq _K_hair~ab~adi, a close friend and intellectual colleague of Ghalib, Sh~ah ‘Abdul‘az~iz and several other ‘ulam~a were engaged in activities against the British government. Maul~an~a Fa_zl-i |Haq was arrested and sent to the Andaman Islands where he died in prison. Syed Ahmad Khan of Aligarh used to go to the grand mosque of Delhi to attend the lectures of Sh~ah ‘Abdul‘az~iz. Sh~ah Ism~a ‘~il had declared India the abode of war (

d~ar al-|harb). Among the Urdu poets, Momin _K_h~an Momin is reported to have joined the Vahh~abi Movement of Syed A|hmad Barelvi.  

We do not know much about Ghalib’s childhood in Agra, but we do know that he was not a serious student and often skipped school to play in the streets. At the age of thirteen he was married. School held no interest for him but he had a natural affinity for Persian language and literature. In those times, Persian was the cultural language of Muslims in northern India and was the main source-language for literature, history and other disciplines. He says in one of his letters that he got in touch with an Iranian scholar in Agra and from him learned a great deal about Persian language and literature, Islamic mysticism and Muslim philosophy. He also had some knowledge of astrology. However, his poetic intellect found itself more comfortable with the Sufi world view which had infinite space for philosophical experimentation. He loved Persian, the main source language of intellectually rich mystic poetry, and studied all the eminent Persian poets and their mystic themes (ma_z~am~in), their mystic experiences and their poetic treatments.  

The present study is an attempt to get a sense of Ghalib’s intellectual concerns and the nature of the duality of poetic beauty and the complexities of meanings. Exploration of the philosophical flights of his imagination brought to light the duality of Ghalib’s life—|hay~at-i _tab~i ‘~i (natural life) and |hay~at-ishe ‘r~i (poetic life). Every great poet leads a dual life. But Ghalib’s poetic life is different from the poetic lives of other poets in the sense that it is not derived from mere concepts, emotions, and imagination, but is inhabited by certain ‘values’. The difference between his poetic life and natural life is like that between ‘value’ and ‘concept’.  Both are as different from each other as concepts differ from values. While concepts are amenable to change in time, value remain unchanged. Concepts have a transitory existence within a particular duration of time while values, for their owner, are universal, timeless and spaceless. These are the values that have infused universalism, timelessness and spacelessness in Ghalib’s poetry. Understanding Ghalib, the thinker, was never easy; Ghalib, the poet was always there, deflecting attention to the fascinating beauty of his poetry. So far as Ghalib himself is concerned he is proud of his being a poet of meanings.

نہ رنجم گر بصورت ازگدایاں بودہ ام’ غالب

بدارالملک  معنی   می    کنم   فرماروایہا

nah ranjam gar ba-|s~urat az gad~ay~an b~udah am, Ghalib!

ba-d~arul mulk-i ma‘n~i  mi kunam fam~arav~a’iha

{It does not matter if I look like one of the beggars, I rule over the capital of meanings.}