The Handbook of Mirza Ghalib’s Poetry and Poetics — Commentaries and Contemporary Concerns
By Tariq Rahman
Springer
ISBN: 978-981-99-9892-2
779pp.

It was Lord T. B. Macaulay who, in the third decade of the 19th century, envisioned producing a new hybrid class — Indian in blood and colour, and English in taste and knowledge.

Later, Sir Abdul Qadir realised, in the closing years of the 19th century, that this new class had become alienated from the Indian way of life and literature, particularly Urdu literature. Mind you, Qadir didn’t question the colonial logic of creating such a class. He fathomed the cultural consequences this class was ordained to bear.

Thus, in his book The New School of Urdu Literature, Qadir endeavoured to abate this alienation by writing in English about the new stalwarts of Urdu literature, such as Hali, Azad, Abdul Halim Sharar and Nazeer Ahmad. He had realised that the English language, the cause of the alienation, could cure the alienation.

This hybrid class has continued to thrive, as has the sense of alienation. Numerous scholars, from Reynold A. Nicholson, Dr Abdul Latif and Ram Babu Saksena to Dr Muhammad Sadiq, Ralph Russel, Khursheedul Islam, as well as David Mathews, Francis Pritchett, Mehr Afshan Farooqi, Michael R. Burch and now Tariq Rahman, have made efforts to introduce Urdu literature to English-speaking audiences through history books and translations.

Dr Tariq Rahman’s book on Ghalib is an exceptional scholarly work that might prompt new thinking on a few themes in classical poetry

Dr Tariq Rahman, a distinguished linguist and author of several books on diverse topics ranging from onomastics to war studies, has published a remarkable book on Mirza Ghalib. In the introduction of The Handbook of Mirza Ghalib’s Poetry and Poetics — Commentaries and Contemporary Concerns, he states that the book is intended to make Ghalib’s Urdu poetry understandable and enjoyable for people who are not familiar with Urdu literature and, possibly, not even with the Urdu language. Rahman begins by outlining the life and works of Ghalib and provides a detailed survey of classical Urdu ghazal.

In the first chapter, Rahman emphasises the recurring themes that may appear challenging for English-speaking audiences. He seems to be aware of the various misconceptions surrounding the moral values and aesthetic conventions of Urdu ghazal, and even the definition of ghazal as a genre of poetry.

He explains at the outset that the ghazal is a unique literary genre, originating from a specific composite Indo-Muslim culture. Its distinctness cannot be comprehended in terms of Western poetry genres. Although ghazal is lyrical, it is neither similar to a lyric nor a sonnet. Unlike the lyric and the sonnet, a ghazal is not about a single subject, theme or argument. Ghazal is also distinct from nazm, which focuses on a single theme.

Some critics have termed this unique aspect of the ghazal as reza khayali, which means incoherent, inconsistent thinking. It is intriguing to note that a few critics, who have been educated in Western literary traditions, have come to view this reza khayali as the downside of ghazal. For instance, Kalimuddin Ahmad, a noted Urdu critic and a graduate of Cambridge, declared that reza khayali is the hallmark of the barbarian mind. Therefore, the ghazal writer experiences an incoherent, disjointed state of mind, which is unique to barbarian people.

In contrast to a ghazal, the nazm deals with a single theme, so it is coherent, reasoned, consistent, and indicative of a cultivated civilised mind. Ahmad borrowed this argument from George Santayana, an American philosopher, poet and critic who reckoned Browning and Walt Whitman as ‘semi-barbarian’ poets. Ahmad’s critique of the Urdu ghazal was a continuation of the out-of-cultural context reading or misreading of the Urdu ghazal by colonial European reformers and their Indian acolytes. Rahman has dedicated many pages of the book to analysing the objections against the ghazal.

Outlining objections against the Urdu ghazal, Rahman points out that the theme of eroticism in the ghazal particularly upset Victorian and often evangelical British officers and stirred discontent among Muslim reformers, from Hali to Nazeer Ahmad and Ashraf Ali Thanvi.

However, there was another significant source of concern. In the classical Urdu ghazal, the most prevalent theme is the rebuke of the zahid [puritan], the sheikh [moralist], the mullah [Muslim cleric] and the pandit [Hindu cleric], as well as a robust critique of the separation of masjid [mosque] and mandir [temple].

Under the influence of ‘Wahdat al-Wajood’ [Unity of Being], the poets espoused the belief that the higher reality is pervasive, particularly in the human heart. Consequently, ishq [passionate love] can facilitate a connection to the higher reality.

Aashqi se milay ga a’y zahid
Bandagi se khuda nahin milta
— Dagh Delhvi

[O pious man, God can be found through ardent love, not through worship]

But it was perceived that questioning the authority of the ghazal could potentially lead to dangerous consequences. Such questioning might have prompted poets to challenge the legitimacy of colonial rulers.

Rahman says that, in Urdu ghazal, the beloved has been depicted as a lady, a courtesan, a young man, and even a deity. He thinks that, in all cases, Indian Muslim society made it seem like love between young people was wrong. The argument is interesting. It suggests that poetry reflects everyday life.

This is why Rahman says that ghazal poets engaged in paedophilia and harassment. We must address this accusation. In classical ghazal, we find couplets that express a desire to meet with young, beardless boys and also depict sexual harassment. Can we read them as reflecting true events or just an imaginary mazmoon [theme] of ghazal? It is pertinent to explain that this kind of interpretation of Urdu poetry started in the late 19th century, influenced by the introduction of Western realism.

Classical Urdu ghazal poets followed a convention of mazmoon aafreeni [creating themes] and maani aafreeni [creating meaning]. Mazmoon was a statement about the world, and it was something that poets had in common. They would seek new dimensions of old mazmoon, common among poets, new meanings, and a unique style or andaaz.

Rahman has affirmed that the Urdu ghazal was not intended to portray social reality in its raw form, but his overall stance on the Urdu ghazal is characterised by a belief in realism. The debate about paedophilia and harassment stems from a reliance on the authority of the canon of realism.

A major part of the book is dedicated to translating and providing commentary on Mirza Ghalib’s Urdu divan. It includes Urdu and Roman versions of asha’ar [couplets], along with a glossary of keywords. Ghalib is considered a mushkil pasand [complex-seeker] poet who loves to delve into complexity. His mushkil pasandi doesn’t lie only in his Persianised poetic style but also in the sophistication and intricacy of his themes. In a couplet, Ghalib states that his poetry is “ganjeena-i-maani ka talism” [a talisman of the treasure of meanings].

Hence, it has been a gigantic task for Rahman to truthfully translate the meaning(s) of each verse in Ghalib’s divan and to provide commentary on it. While providing commentary, Rahman always keeps his target audience in mind. He aims to explain the meanings of each couplet in a simple, clear and cogent manner. It has been his preference to make Ghalib’s Urdu divan accessible to the non-Urdu-speaking world.

Except for a few explanations of Ghalib’s poetry, Rahman refrains from delving into differing interpretations of Ghalib’s poetry, provided by renowned Urdu critics such as Hali, Nazm Tabatabai, Josh Malsiyani, Yousuf Saleem Chishti, Agha Baqir, Partao Rohilla, Ralph Russel, Shamsur Rahman Faruqi, Anjum Altaf and others. It must be noted that Rahman has extensively studied and utilised all the available resources on Ghalib in Urdu and English. He has mentioned the dates of the composition of Ghalib’s ghazals where necessary.

In most instances, the commentary is concise, well-articulated and to the point. However, intermittently, the author aims to provide commentary that is reflective of current social realities. He appears to hold the view that Ghalib’s poetry offers insights that are pertinent to understanding the complexities of the modern world.

As the author intends to make Ghalib’s poetry accessible to those unfamiliar with Urdu language and literature, he avoids indulging in pure formal, literary and hermeneutic issues, such as differentiating between the voice of the poet and a traditional narrator of classical poetry.

We don’t find a detailed discourse about khayal bandi, an Indian style of Persian poetry employed by Ghalib in Urdu ghazal, which aims to create a world of fantasy impregnated with multiple meanings. In the words of Ghalib, he is andaleeb-i-gulshan-na-afreeda [a nightingale of an unborn garden].

To sum up, this is truly an exceptional scholarly work that might prompt new thinking on a few themes in classical poetry. It’s well worth reading in full.

The reviewer is a Lahore-based Urdu critic and short story writer. Currently, he is serving as Head of Publications at the Gurmani Centre, LUMS. He is the author of Naye Naqqad Ke Naam Khatoot and Urdu Adab Ki Tashkeel-i-Jadeed

Published in Dawn, Books & Authors, September 29th, 2024